sounds like hes not so sure hes got it wrapped up

**BlueWahooChambordDevil** · November 1st, 2008, 02:19 AM

was it?

i dont think so

the bottom line is he did say it......it doesnt matter when or why

he did

you claimed he never did......and as usual youve been undressed on the issue and are now trying to spin things in your favor because you know that as usual you are wrong

again.....get a clue then try and discuss adult topics with the adults

**R13** · November 1st, 2008, 02:24 AM

You are pathetic. Your defense is "He said it, doesnt matter why, he said" Then I gave you an pretty logical explantion as to why he did, which btw you never disputed. I asked a few times to give me a recent quote, recent meaning atlest when he was named the nominee and you cant do apparently. Looks like you were the one who was undressed on the issue.

**BlueWahooChambordDevil** · November 1st, 2008, 02:25 AM

your love for him is actually pretty disturbing

it doesnt matter when or why he said it.......the bottom line is that he did

yet you still refuse to admit he did

**R13** · November 1st, 2008, 02:29 AM

Your hate for him is pretty sad.

I acknowledged he said it and gave you a logical reason as to why he did.

Btw why is it irrelevant why and when he said it? I'd say the context in which someone says something is pretty relevant to the meaning of the statement.

**BlueWahooChambordDevil** · November 1st, 2008, 02:31 AM

the reason its relevant is because he said it then and now in typical fashion is back tracking on the statement he made much the way hes done on just about everything else

**R13** · November 1st, 2008, 02:33 AM

But if the original statement was said for a complete reason, its not really backtracking. Its not like he said a week ago he was going to beat John Mccain in a lanslide, he said he was going to beat the Rep come November to rally support for his nomination.

**BlueWahooChambordDevil** · November 1st, 2008, 02:37 AM

so by saying he was going to beat the republicans in a landslide despite not knowing who the nominee on the other side would be......it seems as thought he didnt seem to care too much who it would be

he didnt say ill beat any rep except john mccain or anything like that........did he?

stating that despite not knowing who your opponent would be is the epitome of brazen

**R13** · November 1st, 2008, 02:39 AM

What part of trying to solidify his spot as the nominee by making a comment like that one dont you understand?

November 1st, 2008, 08:09 AM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BlueWahooChambor</div><div class="ubbcode-body">so by saying he was going to beat the republicans in a landslide despite not knowing who the nominee on the other side would be......it seems as thought he didnt seem to care too much who it would be

he didnt say ill beat any rep except john mccain or anything like that........did he?

stating that despite not knowing who your opponent would be is the epitome of brazen </div></div>
After the last 8 years , you could have run a dog's butt (it remains to be seen if they did [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]) and won against anyone who voted in line with Bush. The Dems didn't win, Bush lost this. [img]/LDPforum/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif[/img]

**BlueWahooChambordDevil** · November 1st, 2008, 12:26 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What part of trying to solidify his spot as the nominee by making a comment like that one dont you understand? </div></div>
once again i dont give a flying frogs fat ass why he said it.......you claimed he never said any such thing.......which clearly he did

regardless of the reason........he said it then and is saying the opposite now