Supreme Court turns down another appeal that claims Obama ineligible to be president

[NeoRio1]

Quote from trendlover:

I understand you are saying people vote for issues that Obama claim he will change if he is president. Then you say he has no experience with those issues, so why did people vote for him without looking at experience.
Landis is saying that now Obama is elected, he tries to pick the best people to help him with the issues he campaign on.
So Obama built a trust with people that his character is good, and McCain (through experience) has prove to some voters that they do not want him as their president.
So it is like this for example. You have 2 cookies. One you have tasted before, and you are not happy with the taste. And one you have never tasted, but you look at the ingredients in the cookie, and it looks like it will taste good. So you choose the cookie you never tasted before, not just becasue you hate the taste of the other cookie, but because the ingredients look good.

Your anology is spot on. Unfortunately it is spot on for my argument and not yours.

You get the ingredients to make this new cookie. You or no one else has ever tasted the cookie ever in their lives. You make the cookie. You eat the cookie. You either love, like or just think that it is an average cookie. The crazy thing about this is that before you ever tasted the cookie you never really new if the cookie was going to taste great or horrible.

Now lets invite a scenario in which the end result of the cookie has much more significance and importance than whether your taste buds appreciate the taste or not. Lets say you are a world class chef. You are in the biggest cookie making competition in the world and the grand prize is 100k. If you were this chef would you try and make a cookie you have never made before or would you make the cookie that you have made countless times that has received countless amounts of appreciation by people?

Now we have gone from the degree of importance of taste buds to winning a cookie competition to becoming the leader of a large majority of the world. If you were a voter would you vote for someone who has no experience with any of the major issues or would you vote for the candidate that has proven themseleves countless times who has received countless amounts of appreciation by people?

The bottom line is that Obama is a really big risk. The reason he is such a big risk is because he has no past results when it comes to the most important issues he claims he can change. It's like putting a person who has never driven in a race in the Nascar 500. The guy might have a huge ambition to race in the Nascar 500 but if your a part of that racing team (country) do you really think that sounds like a good idea?

 

[trendlover]

Quote from NeoRio1:

Your anology is spot on. Unfortunately it is spot on for my argument and not yours.

"You get the ingredients to make this new cookie. You or no one else has ever tasted the cookie ever in their lives. You make the cookie. You eat the cookie. You either love, like or just think that it is an average cookie. The crazy thing about this is that before you ever tasted the cookie you never really new if the cookie was going to taste great or horrible."

Now lets invite a scenario in which the end result of the cookie has much more significance and importance than whether your taste buds appreciate the taste or not. Lets say you are a world class chef. You are in the biggest cookie making competition in the world and the grand prize is 100k. If you were this chef would you try and make a cookie you have never made before or would you make the cookie that you have made countless times that has received countless amounts of appreciation by people?

Now we have gone from the degree of importance of taste buds to winning a cookie competition to becoming the leader of a large majority of the world. If you were a voter would you vote for someone who has no experience with any of the major issues or would you vote for the candidate that has proven themseleves countless times who has received countless amounts of appreciation by people?

The bottom line is that Obama is a really big risk. The reason he is such a big risk is because he has no past results when it comes to the most important issues he claims he can change. It's like putting a person who has never driven in a race in the Nascar 500. The guy might have a huge ambition to race in the Nascar 500 but if your a part of that racing team (country) do you really think that sounds like a good idea? [/QUOTE




Poeple know the past ingredients did not taste good. They want to try the new ingredients. What is more risk, to know the past ingredients did not taste good, but take a bite, or take a bite of something never tasted?

 

[NeoRio1]

Quote from trendlover:

Quote from NeoRio1:
Poeple know the past ingredients did not taste good. They want to try the new ingredients. What is more risk, to know the past ingredients did not taste good, but take a bite, or take a bite of something never tasted?

Apparently you have no idea how to logically provide a solution to anything.

If someone was to go about with your logic they would try developing their own pain medications treating migranes from their own local park.

I mean come on Trendlover.

If you have a recipe that fails than you don't put all your money on a recipe that has never been proven.

What you do is you find a solution that has evidence of working because in the past it has worked.

Instead of the voting population buying a new car when their previous car is broken down they buy some type of flying hover craft that has no warranty and no previous historical results of working. THE THING HAS NEVER EVEN BEEN SEEN WORKING BEFORE.

The voters went all in on a product that has never been seen to work.

 

[trendlover]

Quote from NeoRio1:

Apparently you have no idea how to logically provide a solution to anything.

If someone was to go about with your logic they would try developing their own pain medications treating migranes from their own local park.

I mean come on Trendlover.

If you have a recipe that fails than you don't put all your money on a recipe that has never been proven.

What you do is you find a solution that has evidence of working because in the past it has worked.

Instead of the voting population buying a new car when their previous car is broken down they buy some type of flying hover craft that has no warranty and no previous historical results of working. THE THING HAS NEVER EVEN BEEN SEEN WORKING BEFORE.

The voters went all in on a product that has never been seen to work.

If you have 2 choices only, and have to choose, and one has shown the economy is bad, and one has asked for a chance to prove itself, what do you choose?

 

[insider trading]

Quote from NeoRio1:

Apparently you have no idea how to logically provide a solution to anything.

If someone was to go about with your logic they would try developing their own pain medications treating migranes from their own local park.

I mean come on Trendlover.

If you have a recipe that fails than you don't put all your money on a recipe that has never been proven.

What you do is you find a solution that has evidence of working because in the past it has worked.

Instead of the voting population buying a new car when their previous car is broken down they buy some type of flying hover craft that has no warranty and no previous historical results of working. THE THING HAS NEVER EVEN BEEN SEEN WORKING BEFORE.

The voters went all in on a product that has never been seen to work.

When has Mccain ever made things work ?I don't mean to start Mccain bashing again,but whenever someone says voting for Obama was wrong,i have to remind them of the other choice




Mccain graduated among the bottom of his class while Obama graduated among the top of his

Mccain crashed 2 airplanes,ran into power lines while flying another plane,and was shot down while flying another plane.

after only 4 days of capture Mccain admitted to war crimes,said that the US was bombing Vietnam civilians,and participated in propaganda films for the enemy



mccain cheated on and left the wife that stayed faithful to him while he was a prisoner because she was disfigured from a car accident and no longer pretty

of all the qualified republicans fit to lead the nation if Mccain were president and died ,that he picked that idiot Palin as a gimmick and publicity stunt

Mccain thought the economy was strong,but at the same time suspended his campaign to go to Washington to work on fixing the economy he thought was strong


Mccain changed his economic polices daily

Made being against pork his trademark,but voted for a bill with over 100 billion in pork

 

[arealpissedgoy]

Quote from insider trading:



Mccain thought the economy was strong,but at the same time suspended his campaign to go to Washington to work on fixing the economy he thought was strong


Mccain changed his economic polices daily

Made being against pork his trademark,but voted for a bill with over 100 billion in pork

you are debating with what I have termed the sub-human ET neanderthal.

Argument is futile.

8 years of bush and republicon majority does not exist. ideology is what drives their diseased brains.

These neanderthals will vote for satan over Jesus if Satan was the republican candidate ( In most cases, the republicon candidate turns out to be satanic anyway ), and Jesus were democrat.