Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Seriously........what.....the.............are. ....you.....on.....about Todd Akins?

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,7447581.story

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKa5C...ayer_embedded#

!

Sorry guys, this was posted already over in the stay classy thread please go there for discussion.

Again, sorry for the double post.

Wow. That guy seems like a genuine douche.

I wonder what kind of idiotic jerks would donate money towards getting him elected....

Originally Posted by UncleBob Wow. That guy seems like a genuine douche. I wonder what kind of idiotic jerks would donate money towards getting him elected....

It's almost as if your characterization doesn't accurately describe the article...

Nice of you to pull up an article where Republicans tried to sabotage other Democratic primaries with supporting unknown candidates too!

There's a long history of this kind of shit and if you're going to hang your hat on the argument that only "idiotic jerks" would donate money, you can't absolve the "idiotic jerks" that actually support his platform enough to put him in office, which is different from trolling the electorate. Saying that it's the same shit is superficial and juvenile reasoning.

Nuance, motherer. Get some.

Wondered how long it would take for one of the usual suspects to come out in defense of this.

Originally Posted by dohdough Nice of you to pull up an article where Republicans tried to sabotage other Democratic primaries with supporting unknown candidates too! There's a long history of this kind of shit and if you're going to hang your hat on the argument that only "idiotic jerks" would donate money, you can't absolve the "idiotic jerks" that actually support his platform enough to put him in office, which is different from trolling the electorate. Saying that it's the same shit is superficial and juvenile reasoning. Nuance, motherer. Get some.

Besides, Akins' comments put him far, far beyond "Idiotic jerk" category.

So the question was asked "what is illegitimate rape"
I asked my lady since she's in EMS and sees a lot of interesting things in her line of work. There's a girl that trolls "over forty under twenty" type sites and gets guys to come over to her place. If they don't pay her, she calls the cops and makes a rape claim. That would be illegitimate rape. That's from a woman too.

Originally Posted by UncleBob Wondered how long it would take for one of the usual suspects to come out in defense of this.

Now where did I defend it? Did I say that it was excusable or in anyway ok?

Did my argument go over your head or are you just trolling?

Besides, Akins' comments put him far, far beyond "Idiotic jerk" category.

What does this have to do with anything when your initial argument was that we should be blaming the Democrats for this?

"lolz"

I didn't say we should be "blaming the Democrats for this."

We should be blaming the Democrats for donating money to such a man - just like we would if they were, say, Chick-fil-a.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx_UJxuQGXo

Bob is the woman choosing the box.

Originally Posted by nasum So the question was asked "what is illegitimate rape" I asked my lady since she's in EMS and sees a lot of interesting things in her line of work. There's a girl that trolls "over forty under twenty" type sites and gets guys to come over to her place. If they don't pay her, she calls the cops and makes a rape claim. That would be illegitimate rape. That's from a woman too.

That's a false accusation. Illegitimate rape is kind of a silly term to use for such a situation since there was no rape.

Originally Posted by UncleBob Wow. That guy seems like a genuine douche. I wonder what kind of idiotic jerks would donate money towards getting him elected....

That's actually really interesting.

I'm actually glad to see the Dems playing a little hardball and using the ignorant hicks in the Republican primary to their own advantage, hoisting them on their own petard as it were. Well played Dems, well played indeed.

Oh, hey, look - I make a post directly related to the OP and then the post degrades to bickering and insults aimed at me.

Pretty soon, one of the regulars will come in here and complain about how I ruined another thread.

Originally Posted by UncleBob "lolz" I didn't say we should be "blaming the Democrats for this." We should be blaming the Democrats for donating money to such a man - just like we would if they were, say, Chick-fil-a.

So trolling it is?

I guess you assume that Obama meant "business" instead of infrastructure as well?

How would it make any kind of sense that "this" would mean the comments that came out of the candidates mouth as if the Democrats are equally to blame? How is this any different from my argument that you're strictly blaming Democrats for this when you just literally said that we should be should be blaming Democrats? And didn't I just enumerate what the differences were? It's in my very first post in this thread.

Seriously, what the is wrong with you?

Originally Posted by camoor That's actually really interesting. I'm actually glad to see the Dems playing a little hardball and using the ignorant hicks in the Republican primary to their own advantage, hoisting them on their own petard as it were. Well played Dems, well played indeed.

It's shitty when that happens, but it goes both ways. Stories of Republicans doing the same, encouraging their base to vote in the Democratic primary in open primary states when they have an incumbent and want the weakest candidate to get the Democratic nomination etc.

Just one of the many underhanded things that go on in politics today.

"as if the Democrats are equally to blame?"

Oh, hey, there DD goes putting words in my mouth again.

Originally Posted by UncleBob "as if the Democrats are equally to blame?" Oh, hey, there DD goes putting words in my mouth again.

And your point wasn't to merely vilify Democrats for trying to manipulate an election in their favor and therefore more than tangentially responsible for the comments?

Go yourself.

As I clearly stated before - they're not responsible for the comments, but they are fully responsible for where they give money to. Period.

Sorry if that hurts your feelings or something. It's like you're taking it personal that Democratic leaders would give money towards the election of a man who would say something so stupid as the comments made by Akins.

Originally Posted by UncleBob As I clearly stated before - they're not responsible for the comments, but they are fully responsible for where they give money to. Period.

You didn't "clearly state" jack shit. And you think that THIS argument is somehow better than the one that I gave you an out on when I said "tangentially?" You ARE a ing moron.

Sorry if that hurts your feelings or something. It's like you're taking it personal that Democratic leaders would give money towards the election of a man who would say something so stupid as the comments made by Akins.

The only thing I take personally is seeing how dumb you are even when I give you an out with you not taking it.

Originally Posted by dohdough You didn't "clearly state" jack shit.

"lolz"

The whole point was to donate money to someone who would say stupid things and make it easier for the Dems to win.

Now they just gotten even more bang for their buck as it's not only impacting the Missouri senate race, but has gotten national attention, put more fire on the "Republican's hate women" argument and making it easier for Dems to keep focus off the economy/jobs.

Not saying I like the practice, but it's worked out grand for the Dems.