Last edited by rob19; 10-09-2012 at 12:48 PM. Reason: quotation problem
True to form, you come in guns blazing making wild accusations then rip into the guy who proved you wrong. Its a logical fallacy called Ad Hominem and its actually against the TOS of this forum. The difference between your post and Robs is, Rob went after the argument and you went after the person who made the argument. You attempted to deflect the argument by putting him on the defensive. It wont work.
If you dont like people proving your wild accusations wrong, dont make them in the first place. Or, i can rephrase: Damn man, wake the "F" up....
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10...ogical-testing"I'm not here to be a distraction," Pouncey said.
He hasn't used any insults & generally the pofo is more loosely modded than others so he's within the TOS, just maybe not within the confines of logical discourse.
thread title " Romney Cheated in Debate ? "
ya and non of us see direct character assasination just by putting such a BS statement out there....
Normal people without an agenda might have saked, " Did Romney Cheat in the Debate " and you have the nerve to tell me of my wild accusations....and I guess that wouldn't have worked for Rob.....
Don't worry I'm not going to rain on your parade anymore for America is actually seeing through all this BS .....Go back to sleep.....and look for more issues to
Lol, this was funny from comedy central...
New Conspiracy Theory: Mitt Romney Cheated in Debate
Conservatives this morning cried conspiracy over jobs report numbers that favored the Obama administration. Typical conservatives: petty, desperate, reactionary and childish, quick to claim the other side cheated whenever a political news cycle does not turn their way.
In completely unrelated news — have you guy's seen the shocking, explosive evidence that proves Mitt Romney cheated in the debate?! I can't believe Mitt Romney cheated in this political news cycle that did not turn my way!
The Romney campaign claims the item Mitt Romney retrieves from his pocket is a handkerchief and they almost had me fooled, until I read this irrefutable analysis from Daily Kos…
"I have never seen a man's hanky be so uniform and flat coming from a front pant's pocket. Back pocket, yes, breast pocket in a jacket, yes.. but not the front pant pocket."
The conspiracy goes all the way to the top and bottom of his pockets! You may be thinking, "How do they know so much about how handkerchiefs come out of back pockets?" This is Daily Kos we're talking about. All of their writers are certified handkerchiefs-coming-out-of-pant-pockets experts.
Need more circumstantial evidence? CBS Boston's Bill Buck explains…
After the Romney and Obama families chat post-debate the President walks off stage, leaving his notes behind for an aide, no doubt.
But not so for Romney. The Presidential challenger goes back to his lectern to retrieve his items. It is clear that the only thing that Romney takes is paper. Not a handkerchief. Not a white flag. Nothing but paper.
Mitt Romney was so sneaky, he even brought an actual handkerchief with him and used it during the debate. We assume he then cleverly hid it before shuffling his papers, just to make a local CBS affiliate opinion columnist look foolish.
Never has a hanky been used so treacherously. You can even see watch the clip from c-span here.
This all raises the question, what else did Mitt Romney have in his pocket? Some loose change? Maybe someone should make an amatuerish documentary about it called Loose Change and put it online.
That's basically what I asked. The use of a question mark implies I'm asking a question, not making a declarative statement.Originally Posted by cuzinvinny
Well, they were wrong. That's why I told you.Originally Posted by cuzinvinny
That's basically what I asked. The use of a question mark implies I'm asking a question, not making a declarative statement.
OK then i guess in that respect this works for you:
Rob is an Idiot ?
Gotta give credit where its due, you have to victim routine down. Not everything is a conspiracy to discredit Romney, he does that well enough on his own. If you have a rebuttal against Robs argument, you should have stated why you felt the link Rob posted was false instead of declaring "CHARACTER ASSASSINATION!!!!". And even if you feel the need to do so, i would strongly recommend not reminding people of the word "agenda".