The "Stay Classy, Republicans" Super Nintendo Chalmers Thread

[quote name='Quillion']Nope. When someone accuses me of something - paying no taxes for example - I demand that they give me their sources, instead of easily refuting the accusation with readily available documentation. For bonus points, I often "refute" the allegation with a single line of vague information.[/QUOTE]
And if they have evidence that you don't pay taxes, it's your job to show that you do.
 
[quote name='Clak']And if they have evidence that you don't pay taxes, it's your job to show that you do.[/QUOTE]

Anonymous heresay isn't evidence.
 
No, I mean actual evidence. Besides, this isn't what I'm talking about. When you accuse someone of something, something that many people witness all the time, and someone's defense of themselves is, "go back and look", that isn't even defense. If you want to defend yourself like that, you show us we're wrong. It's not the job of your accuser to go back and get evidence for you to defend yourself with.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']mykevermin 2012 would like to ask Mitt Romney 2012 how in the world he got over a hundred million legally into an IRA.[/QUOTE]
Errr....WHAAAAAT???????

nasum...please explain this to me.:whistle2:s
 
I reckon he put super cheap Bain stock in there that he was able to buy at preferred pricing, and then insider traded it all the way up to present value. Putting just $6K of cheap stock by itself annually really cant get you to $100M+
 
[quote name='Clak']No, I mean actual evidence. Besides, this isn't what I'm talking about. When you accuse someone of something, something that many people witness all the time, and someone's defense of themselves is, "go back and look", that isn't even defense. If you want to defend yourself like that, you show us we're wrong. It's not the job of your accuser to go back and get evidence for you to defend yourself with.[/QUOTE]

So, basically, you want me to prove something that doesn't exist?

I tell you what, Clak. You prove to me, without a doubt, that "God" doesn't exist, then I'll determine a way to go back and find a post that doesn't exist.

Seriously, this is what we have to work with here...
 
None...?

[quote name='UncleBob']Just pointing out that the two things folks here and otherwise keep trying to equate aren't the same, no matter how many times certain folks try to make it seem like they are.[/QUOTE]
 
[quote name='UncleBob']None...?[/QUOTE]

So, then, why do you think I posted the image of President Bush giving that speech?

Might it have been in response to something you said in a prior post?

(Hint: it was.)
 
It's funny... myke often gives me **** for not being straight forward when I talk - yet he thinks posting conversations with vaguely related pictures is perfectly okay.

Thumbs up, man.
 
What you see is vague is me holding your hand and walking you through the petting zoo, since you can't figure out things very well on your own. It's cool, I understand.

You said this:

[quote name='UncleBob']Which is why I call out both sides as being **** instead of pretending the **** don't stink on one side.[/QUOTE]

As if that's something to be proud of, neglecting the naivete inherent in thinking both sides are equally corrupt. You then later admit that there's nothing comparable that Obama has done in terms of grandiose claims of responsibility with regard to military actions (and you must - but won't, on account of your lacking any scruples - admit, the "Mission Accomplished" blunder is about as big of a blunder as one can make in that category).

But don't seem to grasp how that shows your big, proud, boisterous "both sides do it" tripe is false on the surface.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So, basically, you want me to prove something that doesn't exist?

I tell you what, Clak. You prove to me, without a doubt, that "God" doesn't exist, then I'll determine a way to go back and find a post that doesn't exist.

Seriously, this is what we have to work with here...[/QUOTE]
Do you look your wife in the face and lie to her like you do to us?
 
Watch your heads, low flying cognitive dissonance coming in.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012...s-shocked-to-find-evolutoin-in-biology-tests/

The same report quotes Representative Ben Waide, who demonstrated his lack of scientific knowledge by saying, "The theory of evolution is a theory, and essentially the theory of evolution is not science—Darwin made it up." Waide went on to say that "Under the most rudimentary, basic scientific examination, the theory of evolution has never stood up to scientific scrutiny."
Click to expand...
Sadly that could have just as easily been from my state.
 
You should have just called it a hypothesis, Darwin. Stupid people would be dumbfounded with a word that big, and thus wouldn't be able to argue against it. But nooooooooooooo, you had to call it a theory, and even rabidly dumb people interpret "theory" as "unproven and thus wrong."
 
[quote name='dohdough']Errr....WHAAAAAT???????

nasum...please explain this to me.:whistle2:s[/QUOTE]

If it's investment growth then you can have twenty gazillion in there.

Contributions:
Ok so there's a limit on contributions. 2011-2012 is $5k or $6k if you've over 50. It's been less in the past, I think $3k in 2004?
However, there's no limit on rollover balances. So if he had 200 IRAs with max contribution and rolled them into one that's also fine. Err wait, he's over 50. Well, you get the idea... 152 IRAs or whatever.

You can also contribute "over the limit" but you're subject to a 6% tax on those amounts. Clever trick really. Don't want to pay your bracket? Toss in enough to drop your 35% down to 6%! Of course you still end up paying the income upon disbursement which is a gamble looking at future tax posibilities.

I don't think you can get preferred stock into a retirement account. I may be wrong as none of my clients have anything like that to worry about. The closest thing would be ESP on Apple stock which has made a 19 year old kid I've known for about 6 years stupid rich (so 25 now and 1st came to me when he was 19). He's buying a Mazerati with cash next year. Yeah, NFL rich.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']right-o.

I'm glad we got bin laden, but not necessarily proud of how it went down (nor ashamed).

It's just unfortunate that the people we debate with here have zero concept of nuance.

Anyway, the point is that Obama has had some pretty significant military accomplishments occur under his watch. If Qaddafi and bin Laden happened under Bush, in the same way they happened under Obama, the right wing would be marching all over the country, waving their flags in the air. Talking heads would proudly display their raging erections (with an American flag tied to the end of it in salute of our great nation) on Fox News - Ann Coulter would be at the forefront. Bush would be christened a war hero, Marc Levin would write some hunk of shit 120-page book blown up in a font to fit 300 pages, published by some white-power house like Regnery Publishing, and it would be a best seller. Generalissimo W. Bush would be championed as an ideal candidate for rescinding term limit laws on sitting Presidents.

Instead, we have the horseshit we're putting up with instead - from the same people who are reacting the way they are because they don't like (D)s. We hear about how Obama wants to gut the military, how he's not responsible for this, etc.

Bullshit. And if you think it's status as bullshit is debatable, you're a fucking moron of such epic proportions. And/or named "UncleBob."[/QUOTE]

My fucking god, I just got back from Florida for vacation a few days ago... I actually listened to some of his shit while I was driving :puke::puke::puke::puke:
 
Wow, Myke... that's what you're going with? This is what you're hanging your hat on?

Let's deconstruct this...

[quote name='mykevermin'][...]thinking both sides are equally corrupt.[/quote]

Did I say equally? Did I ever even imply that? No. I don't think they're "equally" corrupt.

You then later admit that there's nothing comparable that Obama has done in terms of grandiose claims of responsibility with regard to military actions
Click to expand...

Sure. But you're saying "because Obama didn't do this one thing Bush did, that shows that both sides aren't corrupt." Or something. Yeah...

But don't seem to grasp how that shows your big, proud, boisterous "both sides do it" tripe is false on the surface.
Click to expand...

Oh, wait, you think the "it" in "both sides do it" refers expressly to making "grandiose claims of responsibility with regard to military actions". Interesting. Because that's not at all what it meant or said.
 
Oh, good, it's time for the weekly UncleBob parsing of words to an anal-retentive degree. I'm skipping this week's episode, kids. Fill me in the in the end and let me know if the cliffhanger of "does Bob ever remove his head from his ass?" mystery is solved.

[quote name='RealDeals']My fucking god, I just got back from Florida for vacation a few days ago... I actually listened to some of his shit while I was driving :puke::puke::puke::puke:[/QUOTE]

Marc Levin? Well, it'll keep you up while you're driving, that's for sure.

I used to get angry when I listened to him. I heard him opining on "Your World with Neil Cavuto" the other day on FOX News, and it really just made me hella sad inside that people take him seriously as a person who accurately sees, understands, and describes the world in a mature, reasoned way.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Oh, good, it's time for the weekly UncleBob parsing of words to an anal-retentive degree. I'm skipping this week's episode, kids. Fill me in the in the end and let me know if the cliffhanger of "does Bob ever remove his head from his ass?" mystery is solved.[/QUOTE]

Probably for the best that you do bow out now and try to forget that you ever made the baseless statements that you did. Hats off to you, myke... hats off.
 
So Romney seems to be going the route of privacy as to the reason he shouldn't have to release his tax returns to us peons? So will he claim "privacy" with regard to releasing information if he's elected president? That's never been a problem before...

220px-Richard_Nixon.jpg
Oh... right...
 
I wish I lived in a world where I could "win" arguments by claiming my opponents said stuff they never did, then throwing a hissyfit and stomping off when they refuse to defend the stuff they never said in the first place.

Oh, wait... no I don't. Because that's just stupid and pathetic.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Which 'side' do you think is more corrupt?[/QUOTE]

Depends on the exact issue at hand.

A better question to ask would be "How much corruption are you okay with supporting in exchange for getting what you want?"
 
[quote name='dohdough']Make sure you don't say he's white knighting anything guys...:rofl:[/QUOTE]

You know my favorite part about that. You have a history of making everything about race. The topic at hand was about race. Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to draw the conclusion that you chose your words on purpose.

Meanwhile, in a completely unrelated thread that was no where near the topic of race, I post an animated .gif of someone eating popcorn, commenting that I was hoping something (again, completely unrelated to anything involving race or race relations) would happen just because I wanted to observe the fallout from it. And you quickly chimed in with a comment about how my posting that .gif was racist because the celebrity in it was black.

Yeah...
 
[quote name='UncleBob']You know my favorite part about that. You have a history of making everything about race. The topic at hand was about race. Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable to draw the conclusion that you chose your words on purpose.

Meanwhile, in a completely unrelated thread that was no where near the topic of race, I post an animated .gif of someone eating popcorn, commenting that I was hoping something (again, completely unrelated to anything involving race or race relations) would happen just because I wanted to observe the fallout from it. And you quickly chimed in with a comment about how my posting that .gif was racist because the celebrity in it was black.

Yeah...[/QUOTE]
Yups...they're totally the same thing herp derp:whee:

edit: And since you purport to be a person of reason(LOLZ), please explain to me why I would draw the line at calling you an outright member of the KKK after all the other things I've called you?
 
If I had to guess, I'd say you did it because you thought it was a clever way of of doing it. Honestly, DD, I don't try to get inside your head to try to understand how you see things.

I can only imagine it's like some kind of never-ending Benny Hill chase sequence.
 
I know 'white knight' has a racial history, I haven't seen evidence that 'white knighting' has a racial history. DD used the term 'white knighting'.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']If I had to guess, I'd say you did it because you thought it was a clever way of of doing it. Honestly, DD, I don't try to get inside your head to try to understand how you see things.

I can only imagine it's like some kind of never-ending Benny Hill chase sequence.[/QUOTE]
So despite me calling Spokker every variation of being a racist asshole, shitbag, motherfucker, etc, your answer to my question is that I did it for teh lulz and/or I thought I was being cute about it? This seems reasonable to you??? Despite all evidence to the contrary?:rofl:

And you obviously DO try to get into my head or else you wouldn't have tried to fallaciously, and farcically for that matter, mistake "white knight" as a dog whistle for a member of the KKK. All this proves is that you don't know what a dog-whistle is.

The only never-ending Benny Hill chase scene here is you, once again, turning this thread into the bob show. Have fun playing with yourself.
 
[quote name='IRHari']I know 'white knight' has a racial history, I haven't seen evidence that 'white knighting' has a racial history. DD used the term 'white knighting'.[/QUOTE]
I actually used both terms...not that it changes anything really.
 
[quote name='IRHari']I know 'white knight' has a racial history, I haven't seen evidence that 'white knighting' has a racial history. DD used the term 'white knighting'.[/QUOTE]

A) He used both, using "white knight" first.
B) I don't think anyone here would take the suggestion that adding "-ing" to an offensive term would suddenly make it unoffensive. Curious - if someone who has a history of being "White Power" like went and made a lame crack about Obama "monkeying around", would that be okay?

[quote name='dohdough']your answer to my question is that I did it for teh lulz and/or I thought I was being cute about it? This seems reasonable to you???[/QUOTE]

Does the idea of you doing something "for the lulz" seem totally unreasonable to you? Can't you even be honest with yourself?
 
Oh, look. Once again, certain individuals throw attacks directed at me, then get mad because I respond to them. Everyone acted surprised.
 
[quote name='Clak']Why does bob feel like it's our job to prove he isn't a boob? When someone accuses you of something, it's your job to defend yourself.[/QUOTE]

Oh, how, oh, how did I miss this post. This is vs. comedy gold.

Hey Obama, when someone accuses you of forging your birth certificate and being born in Kenya, it's your job to defend yourself. Or something.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Oh, how, oh, how did I miss this post. This is vs. comedy gold.

Hey Obama, when someone accuses you of forging your birth certificate and being born in Kenya, it's your job to defend yourself. Or something.[/QUOTE]
And he did by providing his birth certificate you fucking dolt. I'd ask you to prove yourself not an idiot, but I don't think you can.
 
Of all the comments visable on the first page of that video, the only one that isn't just jerking the creators off says "Obama is a good president." This is one reason why I can't make a blanket statement like "I support the troops", because honestly, I don't support jackasses like those that made that video, or any others who I feel have acted in a way unbecoming of their uniform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top