Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the first part of Obama's answer — that "it's being done on purpose" — was a general statement on attacks, and that the suggestion that he was concurring with, or not disputing, Brody's specific examples "is completely ludicrous."
Obama doesn't believe McCain is trying to cast him as the Antichrist, Burtn said.
completely ludicrous
Obama doesn't believe McCain is trying to cast him as the Antichrist
completely ludicrous
Obama doesn't believe McCain is trying to cast him as the Antichrist
completely ludicrous
Obama doesn't believe McCain is trying to cast him as the Antichrist
completely ludicrous
Well, enjoy your time out in the reeds with your intellectual comrades like Crushed. I think I'm fine with the company I keep, thank you.
On a serious tip, who the fuck would want to keep company with an insufferable jackass that was offered a job by Fox News? I think the company you keep is pretty much restricted to co-workers without a choice in the matter and your family.
By "butthurt" you mean of course, Patel's pathetic casting of people like Barack Obama--who see how "ludicrous" arguments like, "I'm from Texas" are--as "cocksuckers." True. Anyway, you're in good intellectual hands, what with Crushed doing your arguing for you and all. I'll be over here chilling with Barack Obama.
On a serious tip, who the fuck would want to keep company with an insufferable jackass that was offered a job by Fox News? I think the company you keep is pretty much restricted to co-workers without a choice in the matter and your family.
i don't share the politics of my employers. i'm here because it's a job.
On a serious tip, who the fuck would want to keep company with an insufferable jackass that was offered a job by Fox News? I think the company you keep is pretty much restricted to co-workers without a choice in the matter and your family.
i don't share the politics of my employers. i'm here because it's a job.
I didn't even take the job, and people here were saying I should have. It's just a random, incomprehensible attempt to find some way to hurt me emotionally, or make himself feel better for apparently being on the losing side of some argument.
On a serious tip, who the fuck would want to keep company with an insufferable jackass that was offered a job by Fox News? I think the company you keep is pretty much restricted to co-workers without a choice in the matter and your family.
i don't share the politics of my employers. i'm here because it's a job.
I didn't even take the job, and people here were saying I should have. It's just a random, incomprehensible attempt to find some way to hurt me emotionally, or make himself feel better for apparently being on the losing side of some argument.
WHUT? First of all, I'm not on the losing side because I don't bother arguing with you. I value my free time more than to waste it chasing you around in circles all day anymore. Second, you have to HAVE emotions to be hurt emotionally, I'm pretty sure.
How many threads have you started about this now? I think "butthurt" applies.
Then why are you posting in this thread. You sound defensive.
But who would honestly think that Obama would say that Mccain did it on purpose?
let's see how many times apf can keep mentioning me for some strange reason
let's see how many times apf can keep mentioning me for some strange reason
For the same reason FoC is invoked: awesome by association.
let's see how many times apf can keep mentioning me for some strange reason
For the same reason FoC is invoked: awesome by association.
Did you actually read Confederacy of Dunces ???
The entire argument therefore hinges on a single tenuous connection between an eagle on Obama's own proposed seal and a single reference to a non-eagle beast (a lion) somewhere in the book of Daniel.
1. he does indeed, and that's why he gave the right response: dismissal. leaving it ambiguous would only have caused the antichrist meme to get repeated and grow. (see: the afore-mentioned swift boats.)
except that the implications of that ad are both obvious and plausibly deniable, as scurrilous political attacks so often are -- and for obama or his campaign to address them would be risky and potentially farcical and incompatible with the presidential aloofness a candidate has got to project. if you can vigorously deny the cargo of that imagery, i'm sure conservative commentators could do much the same
besides, statements from obama's campaign have no logical bearing on the content or intent of that ad -- as someone in the habit of demanding logic from others should know