Or if Olbermann had said it and it was a transcript they would be waxing rhapsodic about how inspired the wording is and how much they just "love" him (not that there's anything wrong with that) so much even though they never watch MSNBC.
High-Risk Credit
- Thread starter Timshel
- Start date
uscitizen
Villified User
Now if Lehrer said it.....
lol, usc thinks broken window panes are the road to wealth. ib1, thinks that there will be one less window pane, permanently. These are simple economic matters that have long ago been settled. Neither could ever hope to have the depth of economic understanding that Paul possesses.
usc... Paul voted with his party 75% of the time. That is much lower than most and includes procedural votes that have nothing to do with ideology.
Further, you show your blatant stupidity here again, arguing that this makes him a neocon. How many times did Paul vote with the Dem majority?
usc... Paul voted with his party 75% of the time. That is much lower than most and includes procedural votes that have nothing to do with ideology.
Further, you show your blatant stupidity here again, arguing that this makes him a neocon. How many times did Paul vote with the Dem majority?
cawacko
Well-known member
it's called speaking out of your *ss.
uscitizen
Villified User
Umm 25% or less. so he is 3/4 republican, but that seems to be the correct ratio for Libertarians.
as to the rest, keep on spinnin string. You will soon have enough to make a rope to hang yerself with
Haha, he took the bait. You sure you don't want to rethink that moron?
And for the rest... I am spinning nothing. You expressed the broken window pane fallacy in the the "Death Penalty for Guns" thread. I know, that may be meaningless to you, since you are economically illiterate. But you can google it and try to lean something for a change (yeah, that's going to happen).
That is it, though it is not even close to being limited to procedural votes. usc is under the delusion that the Dem and Repub majorities are always in opposition. That is not the case.
Truth is, we don't know from the numbers we have (I guess someone could go through and compile the Post data to obtain an answer but I ain't doing it). It may be above 25% or below it. Honestly, since the Dems and Repubs usually agree on such wonderful things as the Patriot Act, my guess is below.
I was going to ask him how many times Hillary, Obama or Edwards had voted with the Repub majority. They may be more neo con than Paul, and I would not be suprised at all if they were very close to being as with the repub majority. I decided to stick to Paul since he was the one we were discussing. The bait was just to show usc's problems with reasoning.
uscitizen
Villified User
The article says he voted with the republican majority &%% of the times that he voted. I will stand on that.
You mean you will fall back to that (nobody has argued that), now that you have had your error rubbed in your face.
uscitizen
Villified User
You mean you will fall back to that (nobody has argued that), now that you have had your error rubbed in your face.
Not my error your nitpicking and spin.
Facts are that Ron Paul voted with the republican party 75% of the time he voted in this congress. Spin the facts however you want to little man.
So you are standing by your argument that based on the data we have he agreed with the Dems 25% of the time? I am sorry, but that's not a fact that can be deduced from the information that he agreed with Repub majority 75% of the time no matter how you spin it.
uscitizen
Villified User
Did I say that he agreed with the dems 25 % of the time. can you quit dancing and spinning ?