Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Your doubletalk is really starting to piss me off.

At 4/9/07 01:00 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Your doubletalk is really starting to piss me off.

Rhetoric bitch, also wheres my damn source of incredible knowledge which I am quite fairly certain by now that it doesn't exists!

I gave you a source... I believe your response to it was... "It does, does it?"

At 4/9/07 12:26 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Here's a few websites just to let you know how uniquely intelligent and suited for the office of President of the United States Mr. George W. Bush really is.

Based on his SAT scores, Bush has the IQ of around 123. Well above average.

At 4/9/07 01:04 AM, Dre-Man wrote: I gave you a source... I believe your response to it was... "It does, does it?"

And I all ready told you that I wasn't talking about 9/11 or bush's intelligence.
Once again you still do not know what your arguing and yet you try to.
Think genious, i might actually give you some credit if you figure out what your suppose to be arguing about.
But until then,
No Source - No Win/Instant Fail

Haha, you still haven't even responded to my post on the middle of page 7. I believe you simply tossed it aside as you deemed it "unsourced".

At 4/9/07 01:00 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Your doubletalk is really starting to piss me off.

Your dumb friggin posts are starting to piss ME off.....

Not much I can do about it though.....

At 4/8/07 10:54 PM, SolInvictus wrote: seven pages? what the hell is wrong with you idiots?

Morons die hard.

At 4/9/07 01:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Haha, you still haven't even responded to my post on the middle of page 7. I believe you simply tossed it aside as you deemed it "unsourced".

Good job changing the subject when you could be "FIGUREING OUT" what your suppose to be arguing about.
Congrats clap everybody he deserves the attention. Apparently hes so smart that hes dumb.
:/

No I'm not side stepping anything really because there is nothing to sidestep for it is not relevant to the argument.

At 4/9/07 01:21 AM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/9/07 01:10 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Haha, you still haven't even responded to my post on the middle of page 7. I believe you simply tossed it aside as you deemed it "unsourced".

Good job changing the subject when you could be "FIGUREING OUT" what your suppose to be arguing about.
Congrats clap everybody he deserves the attention. Apparently hes so smart that hes dumb.

/

You're a complete idiot for one, and on the second hand, you can't even respond to my original argument, which you instead told me to source. Even though what I said really didn't require a website as backup.

No I'm not side stepping anything really because there is nothing to sidestep for it is not relevant to the argument.

Sure it isn't, nice excuse.

IMPEACH PELOSI!!!!

At 4/9/07 11:33 AM, Dre-Man wrote: You're a complete idiot for one, and on the second hand, you can't even respond to my original argument, which you instead told me to source. Even though what I said really didn't require a website as backup.

LOL, you don't even know what your original argument is, therefore how can you tell anyone it doesn't require a source? Your really pathetic. You have a short term memory, no knowledge of history, a lack of morals, bad logic, and yet you still think you are accomplishing something. Just wow.

Sure it isn't, nice excuse.

Wasn't an excuse when it's common knowledge.

At 4/9/07 11:48 AM, TheMason wrote: IMPEACH PELOSI!!!!

YEAH!!1!!one!

oh yeah Dre-Man, I need that source :P

The dems are going to impeach Bush for not being a liberal. Though, they'll say it's for another reason.

At 4/9/07 01:09 PM, JakeHero wrote: The dems are going to impeach Bush for not being a liberal. Though, they'll say it's for another reason.

And if the conservatives impeach Pelosi It'll be for not being a conservative. Though, they'll say it's for another reason.

At 4/9/07 02:20 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote:

At 4/9/07 01:09 PM, JakeHero wrote: The dems are going to impeach Bush for not being a liberal. Though, they'll say it's for another reason.

And if the conservatives impeach Pelosi It'll be for not being a conservative. Though, they'll say it's for another reason.

That's politics for you. The 'the other guy is evil because he's not us' mindset rules supreme in the halls of law.

At 4/9/07 12:33 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/9/07 11:33 AM, Dre-Man wrote: You're a complete idiot for one, and on the second hand, you can't even respond to my original argument, which you instead told me to source. Even though what I said really didn't require a website as backup.

LOL, you don't even know what your original argument is, therefore how can you tell anyone it doesn't require a source?

You're a fucking idiot, I remember crystal clear. You just don't want to answer because you know you can't, fucko.

At 4/9/07 02:23 PM, Dre-Man wrote: You're a fucking idiot, I remember crystal clear. You just don't want to answer because you know you can't, fucko.

Okay then, please tell us what your original argument was about?
If you answer wrongly so help me god.

(LOL your intellectual ability is so humorous!)

At 4/9/07 03:05 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/9/07 02:23 PM, Dre-Man wrote: You're a fucking idiot, I remember crystal clear. You just don't want to answer because you know you can't, fucko.

Okay then, please tell us what your original argument was about?
If you answer wrongly so help me god.

READ IT ON PAGE SEVEN DUMBASS, I AIN'T GONNA COPY AND PASTE.

At 4/9/07 03:30 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

At 4/9/07 03:05 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/9/07 02:23 PM, Dre-Man wrote: You're a fucking idiot, I remember crystal clear. You just don't want to answer because you know you can't, fucko.

Okay then, please tell us what your original argument was about?
If you answer wrongly so help me god.

READ IT ON PAGE SEVEN DUMBASS, I AIN'T GONNA COPY AND PASTE.

I don't even have to look to tell you that your argument is not on Page 7.
Who here is truly the dumb ass?

At 4/9/07 02:20 PM, SyntheticTacos wrote: And if the conservatives impeach Pelosi It'll be for not being a conservative. Though, they'll say it's for another reason.

There's more of a reason to impeach Pelosi than Bush. But incase you didn't read the title, it's "Bush soon to be impeached?" and not "Pelosi soon to be impeached?" Nice try.

You know...

Bush may or may not be impeached; all indications from Congress are that that is NOT in the agenda.

Besides, you remember a year or so ago? When the Bush administration released documents that detailed the secret CIA prisons that were approved by Bush? They were put in place to interrogate prisoners. This is perfectly legal. However, what was not legal was the so called 'water boarding,' where prisoners were made to lie down and had water poured on their face, in order to coerce them into revealing information. THAT is torture, even though the adminstration said it wasn't.

Also, the "Canadian Incident." A CANADIAN citizen was arrested at the U.S./Canadian border for 'looking suspicious.' The fact was: he was returning from a business trip and was on his way home to his wife and children. He was of Syrian descent, but this was all they had to go on. He was sent to a CIA prison for two years, and was then deported to Syria, where he was arrested for being a westerner. He was finally released last year, and has returned to Canada. If not for the Patriot Act, which allowed for such arrests, such an incident would not have happened.

Whether or not Bush will be impeached, I am fairly sure he will be tried for war crimes, whenever his term ends.

By the way, we ARE at war - Congress declared war in 2001, and we INVADED Iraq. 9/11 was not a conspiracy, in my opinion. Besides, there is no evidence to support such reasoning.

And just so you know, Memorize: you don't have to declare war to be at war. You can be at war if someone else has declared war on you. Period.

At 4/8/07 10:53 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

At 4/8/07 08:28 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/8/07 08:15 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

You're an idiot. Read, be educated, and shut your pie hole before you make yourself look more like an idiot.

You realize that we caused that and it was British self defense.
right.

At 4/9/07 03:32 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/9/07 03:30 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

At 4/9/07 03:05 PM, SuperDeagle wrote:

At 4/9/07 02:23 PM, Dre-Man wrote: You're a fucking idiot, I remember crystal clear. You just don't want to answer because you know you can't, fucko.

Okay then, please tell us what your original argument was about?
If you answer wrongly so help me god.

READ IT ON PAGE SEVEN DUMBASS, I AIN'T GONNA COPY AND PASTE.

I don't even have to look to tell you that your argument is not on Page 7.
Who here is truly the dumb ass?

You. are. a. fucking. idiot.

I'll tell you what I am or am not arguing, thank you very much. If you think that you know what I'm arguing about, you're a fucking idiot. I can change what or why I'm arguing whenever the fuck I feel like it.

Now shut your dumbfuck face up, reply to the post on page seven, or keep being a fucktard and trying to tell me what I'm arguing about... which frankly you have no idea obviously.

At 4/9/07 04:31 PM, MoronicLegion wrote:

THAT is torture, even though the adminstration said it wasn't.

Not according to our current laws.

And just so you know, Memorize: you don't have to declare war to be at war. You can be at war if someone else has declared war on you. Period.

We're not even technically at war. I said Congress approved military action you dumb fuck. READ!

This is the most humane war we've ever been in. God, I hate you people.

At 4/10/07 11:53 AM, Memorize wrote: We're not even technically at war. I said Congress approved military action you dumb fuck. READ!

But Congress did not declare war. And in order to enact military action on a foreign nation, you must first declare war.

I don't think you have the clear definition of what a war truly is.

This is the most humane war we've ever been in. God, I hate you people.

"This is the most humane WAR..."

I rest my case.

Bush isn't dumb. I saw some video on how good he was in debating before he became president.

He just can't handle America well. Ignorant? Yes. Dumb? No. If he is dumb, how did he get his way to presidency?

The original question is a possible impeachment of Bush, and IMO yes because some people are trying to see what the government always hides. And it's hell what they hide.

At 4/10/07 11:17 AM, Dre-Man wrote: You. are. a. fucking. idiot.

Name calling please. :P

I'll tell you what I am or am not arguing, thank you very much. If you think that you know what I'm arguing about, you're a fucking idiot. I can change what or why I'm arguing whenever the fuck I feel like it.

By that logic I don't have to reply to what you said below.

Now shut your dumbfuck face up, reply to the post on page seven, or keep being a fucktard and trying to tell me what I'm arguing about... which frankly you have no idea obviously.

A) Arguing is when 2 people have a different view on a certain subject and try to convince the other their views.

B) By that logic you are not technically arguing, but you are making statements.
Basically you can't be arguing with me about something then start making statements about something else and still claim your arguing to the original subject. This is what happened here.
Please argue about the original subject at hand which you obviously forgot what is.
Also this original subject which you first stated needs a source for it to be true and yet you haven't given a source for it therefore you have no argument and your opinionated ways can go fuck a door knob.

At 4/9/07 12:30 AM, Dre-Man wrote: Rarely is the question asked: Is our President a fucking dumbass?

No, Bush may have made a few mistakes but you guys are so blinded by the media and your peers that you have blown everything so far out of proportion that it cannot be recovered. People like the media are the reason this country is so screwed up. You fucking elect Bill Clinton and when we get a decent President you find the smallest things and Blow them out of proportion to protect your beloved pride!

I think the better question is: Are you a fucking dumbass?

At 4/10/07 03:57 PM, Dre-Man wrote:

But Congress did not declare war. And in order to enact military action on a foreign nation, you must first declare war.

Military action is not the same as war. And I already slammed you with that by quoting the fucking constitution.

"This is the most humane WAR..."

We call Vietnam a war, it wasn't.
We call Korean a war, it wasn't.
We call it the Gulf War, it wasn't.
We call this the war on terror, it isn't a war.

Get with the program kid.

I rest my case.

Of being a dumbass.

At 4/10/07 05:23 PM, Nasty-Nas wrote: Bush isn't dumb. I saw some video on how good he was in debating before he became president.

"You're working hard to put food on your family."

"I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully."

"They misunderestimated me."

"Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?"

Go to this website to listen to audio clips.

He just can't handle America well. Ignorant? Yes. Dumb? No. If he is dumb, how did he get his way to presidency?

I know that human beings and FISH can coexist peacefully? How is that an intelligent statement?