or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President - Page 3

post #81 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

As you and others would likely note, the McCains have a very high net-worth. OpenSecrets lists his net-worth as $27,817,187 to $45,045,011.

So, with this huge net worth, he still isn't responsible enough to pay his credit cards in full every month!?

I know who to vote for now.
post #82 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You are welcome to show how conjectures are against the posting guidelines and report them appropriately. I welcome it.

The deliberate or willfully ignorant use of conjecture is not against the posting guidelines. But it is against the concept of integrity.
post #83 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

OpenSecrets.org(PDF)

I guess this is one way to counter the "elitism" tag.

I'm not claiming that anyone running for executive office needs to be wealthy but shouldn't they and those who will assist and influence them at least know how to balance their own books before they claim they want to handle those of the country?

It turns out that Joseph Biden is the poorest member of the Senate, is 65 years old and likely has a huge negative net-worth. His net-worth is listed as From $-302,980 to $277,997 by OpenSecrets.org. He keeps dozens of lines of credit, a new one opened every couple of years and together they add up to huge sums for a guy who has had a better paying job than most for basically his entire adult life.

Biden became a senator at age 30 (5th youngest ever) and has never had to suffer a downsizing, lay-off or threat of his job moving overseas yet he can't save a dime. I don't know if I would rent the guy a house, so why would I want him for Vice-President. It also shows terrible judgment by the man who did select him, Barack Obama.

Did somebody from teh RNC mail you your talking points? Because, like Joe Biden found out, you should attribute your sources.
post #84 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by lundy View Post

You are claiming that saying someone is lying is not calling them a liar? Just say the quoted claims aren't true. No need to involve the person.

But what you are not getting is none of that is a posting violation. You and he and everyone else can claim whatever they want. Then you and he and everyone else can rebut it, without anybody calling anybody any names. Even if he posted that the earth was flat, you can't call him a name, EVEN IF IT WOULD FIT.

Breathing isn't pejorative; lying is. And no, you did not attack the words by saying he is "lying" - that's a direct attack on his state of mind, his intent - which is not the topic. By claiming he is "lying", you propose to know whether he is intentionally misrepresenting facts. Nobody can know what his intentions were, and it isn't relevant. Biden's finances are the topic.


Who's saying you can't attack what you perceive as lies? Here's how you do it:

trumptman: "Biden has dozens of credit lines."
You: "Where? I didn't see any of those in the document you referenced."
trumptman: "Well, he has them - there are others not listed."
You: "Well, show us then - the document only lists 5. Where do you get the "dozens" from?"

I find it very important as a point of argument to state when the words coming out of someone's keyboard are lies.

The words in the above statement about "dozens of lines of credit" are lies. Even in court we bring forth evidence such as this as a legal and proper argument to discredit a witness. To argue every point separately gives far too much respect to the person whose words are lies than they deserve.
post #85 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I find it very important as a point of argument to state when the words coming out of someone's keyboard are lies.

The words in the above statement about "dozens of lines of credit" are lies. Even in court we bring forth evidence such as this as a legal and proper argument to discredit a witness. To argue every point separately gives far too much respect to the person whose words are lies than they deserve.

What's really funny here is that in court you are judged by a jury of your peers. I would say more but ... \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #86 of 143
Subprime thread.

post #87 of 143
The only comment from you know where Nick

[CENTER]
Quote:
Those estimates exclude Biden's largest asset, to wit, the present value of his government pension. These days, most of us work jobs without pensions, and so we endeavor to build a nest egg to support ourselves when we no longer work. People who work in jobs that provide a traditional, defined benefits pension are taking an alternate route to planning for their later years. Military and law enforcement officers often retire reasonably well, with only modest assets outside their pension. When Biden leaves government service, he will have a nice income. In some ways, this is more secure than building a nest egg. I've known more than one elderly person who lost most of their savings through fraud or bad judgment in their later years.

[/CENTER]

[LEFT]Exactly what I've been saying about Biden's government pension. But at 7:01AM this morning. Stunning! Simply STUNNING!!! [/LEFT]

[LEFT]It's like it's money in the bank. Guaranteed. Nick doesn't understand the first thing about working for the government and the excellent benefits and retirement packages.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]And I even put some very real quantitative numbers in my post to boot. Victory is sweet! [/LEFT]

[LEFT]I rest my fucking case. [/LEFT]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #88 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

The only comment from you know where Nick

[CENTER][/CENTER]

[LEFT]Exactly what I've been saying about Biden's government pension. But at 7:01AM this morning. Stunning! Simply STUNNING!!! [/LEFT]

[LEFT]It's like it's money in the bank. Guaranteed. Nick doesn't understand the first thing about working for the government and the excellent benefits and retirement packages.[/LEFT]

[LEFT]And I even put some very real quantitative numbers in my post to boot. Victory is sweet! [/LEFT]

[LEFT]I rest my fucking case. [/LEFT]

While a pension may not leave one broke, it also doesn't improve his creditworthiness. I'm glad Sen. Biden won't be penniless and that he will have a pension to help pay off his $200k in personal loans, mortgage and additional undisclosed debts. I would hate to see him become a burden on society while advocating to improve it.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #89 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

The deliberate or willfully ignorant use of conjecture is not against the posting guidelines. But it is against the concept of integrity.

Well, last I checked, disagreeing with your contention was not a deliberate or willfully ignorant use of conjecture. However I'll be happy to provide the proof when Biden does in filing his 2008 Senate disclosure forms. Attributing dishonesty and lack of integrity due to lack of information sounds like a personal attack.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo View Post

Did somebody from teh RNC mail you your talking points? Because, like Joe Biden found out, you should attribute your sources.

I'm the source there buddy.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #90 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

While a pension may not leave one broke, it also doesn't improve his creditworthiness. I'm glad Sen. Biden won't be penniless and that he will have a pension to help pay off his $200k in personal loans, mortgage and additional undisclosed debts. I would hate to see him become a burden on society while advocating to improve it.

You have no argument, and you never had one. Define exactly what subprime means quantitatively wrt Biden. You can't.

Victory is sweet!

Game over!

I'm loving every moment of this!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #91 of 143
This is the worst thread I've seen in my entire life.

Since the last one at least.
post #92 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

This is the worst thread I've seen in my entire life.

Since the last one at least.

Get this, Biden's present worth on his retirement (assuming CSRS) is like $3,000,000.

No telling what his government life insurance is worth.

No telling what his thrift savings plan is worth.

No kidding.

I've shown you all the real money!

Biden's living on easy street!

Smooth sailing ahead.

I know the real truth.

Been there, done that.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #93 of 143
Sounds like an elitist!
post #94 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Sounds like an elitist!

Wait a minute there.

Doesn't entry into the 1337 KluBz cost like $5M per annum?

And don't 1337 KluBz require a minimum of 53\\/3|\\| HouZeZ?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #95 of 143
Still waiting for a thread on why we should vote for John McCain.

Are there so few reasons?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #96 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I showed you. Do the thinking on it for yourself. Add up the debt. Add up the income. Add up his age. Go do the legwork yourself if you dispute someone having (fuzzy numbers) 90-100% of their income in personal loans is prime.

Nick. Stop. Think. Answer this question:

How can one add up the final debt when the final debt is not disclosed on the form?

It appears that you don't know how to read the form. Debt for the period in question is not disclosed on the form, yet you keep making statements that show that you believe that it is. This confusion of yours either doesn't reflect well on your intelligence, or on your intellectual honesty.
post #97 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Nick. Stop. Think. Answer this question:

How can one add up the final debt when the final debt is not disclosed on the form?

It appears that you don't know how to read the form. Debt for the period in question is not disclosed on the form, yet you keep making statements that show that you believe that it is. This confusion of yours either doesn't reflect well on your intelligence, or on your intellectual honesty.

I didn't claim the final debt. I added up the minimums. If we went with the maximum the numbers would be even worse.

So as an example if the checkbox said $100k-$250k, I used the lowest number.

I'm not claiming the final debt, I'm claiming the MINIMUM debt and the guy looks bad.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #98 of 143
Which of these options is most logical?

A) Obama's vetting team was so incompotent they didn't visit opensecrets.org to learn of Joe's woeful financial situation

B) Obama's vetting team found out about Joe's shaky financials, but thought it didn't matter

C) It was thouroughly looked into, including much more information than opensecrets.org has. Having hard numbers instead of multiple suppositions and assumptions piled on top of one another, they concluded Joe's financials were just fine.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #99 of 143
Thread Starter 
false dilemma.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #100 of 143
Biden has years of experience in foreign relations. Just the man we need right now; the US has a very badly tarnished image thanks to the current occupiers of the WH.

Somebody who likely has PTSD and cheats on his wife and then marries rich also looks very bad. Still waiting for a thread on why we should vote for McCain.

---

Stunned also by the childish Clinton fans who refuse to support Obama. They are part of the very reason she could not be elected POTUS, much less VP.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #101 of 143
Trumpt:

Look, your assertion is that Joe is in poor / tenuous financial shape, yes?

If that assertion is correct, then Obama / Obama's vetting team must have either

A.) not discovered this

or

B.) didn't think it mattered enough to affect the decision to choose Joe.

So, opine for me if you would, which of these two do you think it was? Or if you think there is some third, more likely reason, please enlighten me.
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #102 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I didn't claim the final debt. I added up the minimums. If we went with the maximum the numbers would be even worse.

So as an example if the checkbox said $100k-$250k, I used the lowest number.

I'm not claiming the final debt, I'm claiming the MINIMUM debt and the guy looks bad.

You still don't understand.

Sigh.

That's not the minimum debt. The minimum debt is *zero*, which assumes all debt was paid before the end of the period. You cannot count up the debt when you don't know how much of it was paid. Get it now?
post #103 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You still don't understand.

Sigh.

That's not the minimum debt. The minimum debt is *zero*, which assumes all debt was paid before the end of the period. You cannot count up the debt when you don't know how much of it was paid. Get it now?

Sigh...

I understand completely. I understand that BRussell and yourself prefer to "HOPE" that the reported debt somehow magically and mysteriously does not follow the terms listed in the disclosure document and is somehow paid down early. The document gives ranges. I use the minimum range on the disclosure document. The document lists the length of term and the interest rate. So if I see a checkbox for a loan that was originated in 2005 for a length of ten years and for an amount of no less than $100k and no more than $250k, I treat that as a $100k loan that is two and a half years into the term.

It's almost like I read the information and don't spin it.

Now I know you prefer to believe that even with previous disclosures showing these loans are long term and are being paid down in that manner, and also with no statements from Biden to the contrary, that these loans have somehow magically disappeared since they were disclosed. You want me to believe a change has taken place when there is no information or evidence to support that. Sorry but I don't want to "get it" that way and no one who is honest should claim to want to either.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #104 of 143
Joe Biden got a subprime loan for a boo-boo.
post #105 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Sigh...

I understand completely. I understand that BRussell and yourself prefer to "HOPE" that the reported debt somehow magically and mysteriously does not follow the terms listed in the disclosure document and is somehow paid down early. The document gives ranges. I use the minimum range on the disclosure document. The document lists the length of term and the interest rate. So if I see a checkbox for a loan that was originated in 2005 for a length of ten years and for an amount of no less than $100k and no more than $250k, I treat that as a $100k loan that is two and a half years into the term.

It's almost like I read the information and don't spin it.

Now I know you prefer to believe that even with previous disclosures showing these loans are long term and are being paid down in that manner, and also with no statements from Biden to the contrary, that these loans have somehow magically disappeared since they were disclosed. You want me to believe a change has taken place when there is no information or evidence to support that. Sorry but I don't want to "get it" that way and no one who is honest should claim to want to either.

The form says to indicate the maximum owed during the period, whether it has been paid off or not. You're assuming that it has not been paid off. You may be right and he's never paid off any of his line of credit. Or he could pay off all of it after he uses it, like many people do with lines of credit. Or it could be somewhere in between. But your whole point in this thread rests on the assumption that only one of those possibilities is true.
post #106 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

The form says to indicate the maximum owed during the period, whether it has been paid off or not. You're assuming that it has not been paid off. You may be right and he's never paid off any of his line of credit. Or he could pay off all of it after he uses it, like many people do with lines of credit. Or it could be somewhere in between. But your whole point in this thread rests on the assumption that only one of those possibilities is true.

There are diffferent types of debt. Biden disclosed this specifically as term debt and not revolving debt. If it was listed like a credit card, like some noted on the McCain disclosure, then your point would have some validity. However if I show a ten year term loan that is three years old, and the last three disclosures have listed it, I'm going to assume it is the type of loan listed that is being paid off as described. The prior history will show this and until something in the present changes that, I will assume the same pattern for the future.

You should as well.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #107 of 143
1) Arguing with someone that you believe to be a liar only makes you a fool. Refute it and move on. Liars aren't worth the effort at having a conversation with.

2) Biden is kinda a boring VP choice and leaves the Democrats without an incumbent in 8 years unless they switch horses in 4 years. To quote Cartman...Weeeeeeak.

This opens the door for McCain to pick an inspiring VP. Lord knows he sure as heck isn't inspiring himself.
post #108 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

... I'm going to assume ...

Yes, that's what I've been saying, that you're assuming. It's possible that he doesn't pay them off and he's treating it like any other term loan. It's also possible that a line of credit is just that - a line of credit that he dips into periodically for cash purchases and then pays off, like a credit card.
post #109 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

Yes, that's what I've been saying, that you're assuming. It's possible that he doesn't pay them off and he's treating it like any other term loan. It's also possible that a line of credit is just that - a line of credit that he dips into periodically for cash purchases and then pays off, like a credit card.

It maybe an assumption to believe disclosed information is still true and that in the absense of new information it is still true but the assumption here is no worse than you assuming the sun is going to rise tomorrow morning or that you might enjoy dinner with your wife tonight if that is what you planned. In the end there is only so much we can know and claiming that someone knows nothing because one cannot be omniscient is just not honest. I take Biden at his word. You hope for something diffferent. I may be assuming he is following his word, but your hopes aren't even assumptions, but more like pie in the sky desires.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #110 of 143
Well, there has been this assumption that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice are all guilty of a criminal conspiracy to invade Iraq.

But it's just an assumption. \ ...right?
post #111 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

It maybe an assumption to believe disclosed information is still true and that in the absense of new information it is still true but the assumption here is no worse than you assuming the sun is going to rise tomorrow morning or that you might enjoy dinner with your wife tonight if that is what you planned. In the end there is only so much we can know and claiming that someone knows nothing because one cannot be omniscient is just not honest. I take Biden at his word. You hope for something diffferent. I may be assuming he is following his word, but your hopes aren't even assumptions, but more like pie in the sky desires.

The form is very clear. He discloses the maximum loan he had during the period, not the total amount at the end of the period. You know this, you understand it. Yet you still say you're assuming that "the disclosed information is still true," as if it was disclosed that he never paid anything back. That was never indicated on the form. Why do you persist in claiming it was?

It's no less reasonable to think he has a line of credit that he uses and pays off like a credit card - which is the typical way a line of credit is used - than it is to think that he took a one-time large sum like a traditional loan. The range is "negative several hundred thousand" to "positive several hundred thousand" specifically because the reports can't indicate where in that range the truth is. Yet you're assuming it's the negative number.

You're hearing a weather report that say it's 70 and assuming that the sun is out when in fact it could be cloudy or sunny.
post #112 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

1) Arguing with someone that you believe to be a liar only makes you a fool. Refute it and move on. Liars aren't worth the effort at having a conversation with.

2) Biden is kinda a boring VP choice and leaves the Democrats without an incumbent in 8 years unless they switch horses in 4 years. To quote Cartman...Weeeeeeak.

This opens the door for McCain to pick an inspiring VP. Lord knows he sure as heck isn't inspiring himself.

A long term pattern of apparently untruthful behaviors needs to be tested or checked for it's authenticity and accuracy.

Spurious conclusions made entirely on mountains of assumptions, countless conjectures, absence of critical data necessary to support erroneous conclusions, must always be challenged as bearing false testimony.

This has now been done.

And it will continue to be done until such time as this long term pattern of apparently untruthful behaviors ends.

But it won't end, so the best that can be done is to discredit these forms of argumentation for their untruthfulness.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #113 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

The form is very clear. He discloses the maximum loan he had during the period, not the total amount at the end of the period. You know this, you understand it. Yet you still say you're assuming that "the disclosed information is still true," as if it was disclosed that he never paid anything back. That was never indicated on the form. Why do you persist in claiming it was?

It's no less reasonable to think he has a line of credit that he uses and pays off like a credit card - which is the typical way a line of credit is used - than it is to think that he took a one-time large sum like a traditional loan. The range is "negative several hundred thousand" to "positive several hundred thousand" specifically because the reports can't indicate where in that range the truth is. Yet you're assuming it's the negative number.

You're hearing a weather report that say it's 70 and assuming that the sun is out when in fact it could be cloudy or sunny.

BRussell, do me a favor and go read up on different types of credit. It is not reasonable to argue that types of credit and the terms that define them are just interchangable with each other and thus we should ignore what is written down.

If you understood the difference between the between types of credit, you would understand that while it may be 70, you are trying to tell me that sunny could really be cloudy. It isn't "like a traditional loan" because I want it to be that way and just want to put Biden in a bad light. It is "like a traditional loan" because that is the type of loan he took and what he also disclosed. You say he could be using it like a credit card. This type of debt has a particular name. It shows up differently on credit reports and also on the disclosure reports. Under term it either has N/A or revolving. Term debt, installment debt, the labels might vary a bit from place to place, but it is the "traditional loan" that you note and that is why cloudy can't be sunny.

If he borrowed it and even just stuck it in his bank account for a rainy(or even cloudy) day, that would be on the disclosure sheets and wouldn't change his networth. He would have a $50k liability and $50k in a savings account which is disclosed as well. It is when he has the liability alone that it lowers the networth.

So yes, "I do know" and by that I mean I know a bit more than most since I read credit reports regularly. If he listed a $40k car loan for a term of 5 years, it is possible he could pay it off early. It is also possible he could pay it off, then take another loan. Finally it is possible he could have the money to pay it off, but just sit on it. What is not possible is to claim the car loan is just revolving debt. It is installment debt. It is different. Cloudy is not sunny even if it is 70.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #114 of 143
Thread Starter 
[

You are going to have to do a little better than claiming anyone that uses a government form to come to a conclusion is somehow needing a coffin because you think the government form to be crap.

The pension provides income. Income means he isn't starving. It doesn't mean he isn't or can't go broke.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #115 of 143
It is simply amazing how Republicans can make Democrats dance to their tune about every little detail about their candidates. This is how we win and you lose.

Is it a personal attack if I'm laughing at you guys as you fall for it time and time again? I dunno since the laughter isn't directed at any single individual.

Hard call but a potential ban is worth pointing out the silliness of it all.
post #116 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You are going to have to do a little better than claiming anyone that uses a government form to come to a conclusion is somehow needing a coffin because you think the government form to be crap.

The pension provides income. Income means he isn't starving. It doesn't mean he isn't or can't go broke.

Crap? Your word not mine. Double negative? So Biden is broke? Prove it quantitatively. You can't. I win.

Show us all where Biden has filed Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy if he is in fact broke as it appears that is one of your two ambiguous answers. I'm waiting ...



Try to address the points, you haven't, therefore I win by default.

Victory speech forthcoming ...
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #117 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

It is simply amazing how Republicans can make Democrats dance to their tune about every little detail about their candidates. This is how we win and you lose.

Is it a personal attack if I'm laughing at you guys as you fall for it time and time again? I dunno since the laughter isn't directed at any single individual.

Hard call but a potential ban is worth pointing out the silliness of it all.

There are only a few posters that I even bother with, and only when they try to present data erroneously or some hard numbers are available that fully refute their statements.

In other words, it's hammer time.

It's way too easy when they misrepresent the data, or don't even know what the data truly represents, as is the case here.

It's sport.

It's like they stepped of a cliff thinking that all the words in the world that they say will break their fall and save them in the end.

But all that happens is that they hit the ground at terminal velocity and go SPLAT!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #118 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

There are only two posters that I even bother with, and only when they try to present data or some hard numbers are available.

In other words, it's hammer time.

It's way too easy when they misrepresent the data, or don't even know what the data truly represents, as is the case here.

It's sport.

It's like they stepped of a cliff thinking that all the words in the world that they say will break their fall and save them in the end.

But all that happens is that they hit the ground at terminal velocity and go SPLAT!

Mkay...but it makes the appearance of Smoke if you know what I mean. Then we can infer Fire from said Smoke...

Actually, I really am not pointing at any one person here. It just seems like a general trend for how these things go.

Although I will point out that they have successfully annoyed you guys enough that one of you have been banned already.

So Conservatives 1 Liberals 0.

Or did I miss a banning?
post #119 of 143
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Crap? Your word not mine.



Try to address the points, you haven't, therefore I win by default.

Victory speech forthcoming ...

I think if victory is based off persuasion then you won't have won much. I noted early on that those forms excluded many types of debt. Pensions are not considered traditional assets and you can't leave them to anyone or just sell them off as you seem to try to suggest. You can have fun with claiming conspiracy via a very neutral site (Opensecrets.org) and also claiming that someone is "wrong" because you know something the forms don't which really means you've made it up. Bring on that speech. I'm sure it will be pretty convincing. I'll give you a cookie.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #120 of 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I think if victory is based off persuasion then you won't have won much. I noted early on that those forms excluded many types of debt.

Just debt? Right there you show your true colors. Half an argument is no argument at all! \

I noted that those forms excluded many types of assets.

See how that works? No? Thought so. Hammer nail, Hammer nail, Hammer nail, ...
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President