Yup you’re right. That dude yelling ‘kill him’ was talking about Abe Vigoda. Look out Abe!

Ed Donovan, a spokesman for the Secret Service said this:
However, he cautioned that at the McCain rally, "no Secret Service agent overheard any threatening statement and no threatening statements were reported by law enforcement or the general public.""We did make some inquiries after the Washington Post reported on Tuesday that a someone had yelled ‘kill him,’" he added.Donovan said it wasn’t clear whether the threat was actually vocalized or, if so, if it was meant for Obama or even Ayers, both of whose names were uttered by Palin at that moment in her speech.For those reasons, he added, the investigation was dropped.

Notice despite your hyperbole in the Peak Oil thread, I made no comments about it there. Hyperbole in that thread does no harm to your argument. Hyperbole in this thread demonstrates Dean’s point.

But since you’re too pissed to listen, you’ll never understand that.

Again, I love your logic. "All I have to do to claim victory in an argument is piss off my opponent."

Find me a video that shows conservatives acting like the liberals in the video from New York or admit that you can’t.

That video IS my argument Martin. Refute the video. Your pathetic sophomoric attempt to turn the argument into a pissing match over the use of a common term widely used in conversation is what is pissing me off.

Here’s an analogy. "Mom, I can’t eat these brownies, they’re full of walnuts."  "Oh they can’t be FULL of walnuts, or there’d be no brownie, just walnuts silly boy, therefore you have to eat the brownies."

That’s the level of logic of your argument Martin. And your whole "if you get mad, you must be losing" thing is just as simplistic and sophomoric. I’m not mad because I’m losing, Martin, I’m mad because you are turning a discussion of relative craziness on Left vs. Right into a personal crusade for your own compulsive desire to define the terms of the argument. It’s not the first time. This is something about you that really gets under my skin. Your belief that you have ultimate authority on the use of terms in an argument is about as frustrating and counter-productive as any debate dynamic I have ever encountered. We’ve now spent MOST of this thread arguing over whether or not “full of” is hyperbole or common use with common understanding. You haven’t even BEGUN to address the ACTUAL topic of this debate Martin, you’ve dragged it into another of your compulsive definitional cul-de-sacs and you’re now chortling over how you’ve managed to piss off your opponent.

But, as I said, you’ve done it before and you’ll do it again. If you had any actual MERIT to your argument you’d present THAT instead of this insane compulsion of yours to get your own use of “full of” recognized as the ONLY use of the term.

Debate the topic Martin. FORGET the supposed hyperbole. Say something that actually ADDRESSES the merit of the argument. PROVE to me that the right is as unhinged as the left. Find me a video that refutes the one I referred to. Or, as I said, admit you can’t.

CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Podcars?. fiction or fact?

"I made you mad by being a pedantic moron, therefore you are wrong."

Geez, you win a lot of debates with that definition I’m sure. At least in your own mind you do.

CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Toon of the Day