Can liberals be honest and reply to these questions? I seriously doubt it....

<link>

i'm not a liberal bt I'll answer these questions.

first up, what a retarded moronic question of profound stupidity. yes, as the president of the USA I believe those kids are coming first before any other. we protect our president and his family for serving our country. just like I don't expect the children of a president to ride a school bus like my kids do. Onl the profoundly stupid need this explain to them,

the second question is even more retarded then the first. how predictable. first, this isn't the job of a president to do. secondly, this goes to show just how far the anti american scum on the right are willing to shove their head up their ass and manufacture strraw because when it comes to the real issues of the day they get laughed off the public stage the dumbass idiots they are.

now, if there is any more of your profound stupidity I can answer, just pull down your pants and speak out your ass some more.

It's incredible that you'd post such a stupid question, but the fact that it originated on a blog you visit goes a long way to explaining why so many of you are so profoundly moronic. You are what you consume, I guess.

I always thought it was "socially unjust" that the Bush twins could run amok getting drunk and making asses of themselves and charge taxpayers for Secret Service to act as fixers in a jam, but keeping the President's kids safe and healthy is a perk we grant so that the Commander in Chief has one less thing to worry about, dickweed.

i'm not a liberal bt I'll answer these questions.

What views of yours are not liberal?

first up, what a retarded moronic question of profound stupidity.

Never mind the ad hominem...

yes, as the president of the USA I believe those kids are coming first before any other.

Well, so you telling us that you are the president of the United States? Well, isn't it cool? Or maybe, you wanted to say that those kids are our president? Can you sober up and explain what your opinion is?

we protect our president and his family for serving our country.

Obama's children serve our country? Explain. A janitor at McDonalds does more for this country than Obama's kids... Why should not he be protected?

just like I don't expect the children of a president to ride a school bus like my kids do.

Don't worry, Obama was sending him to private school - no one expects they will be sharing a bus with hoi poloi. But you see, my older son also does not share a bus with the prols, and neither of us would expect this, right?

Onl the profoundly stupid need this explain to them,

You keep saying that my questions are stupid, but you cannot explain why - except that you have a set of assumptions.

the second question is even more retarded then the first. how predictable.

This comes from a guy who claimed he was the president of the United States?

first, this isn't the job of a president to do.

Yes, the president should look cool, fly around the country and make speeches. It's not like he presides over the EXECUTIVE branch, which is supposed to execute, you know, not hyper-ventilate.

secondly, this goes to show just how far the anti american scum on the right are willing to shove their head up their ass and manufacture strraw because when it comes to the real issues of the day they get laughed off the public stage the dumbass idiots they are.

Ahm. Obama administration screwed up the production of vaccines, and yet, it's stupid to imagine that the president will be hold responsible - cause it's stupid. Right?

now, if there is any more of your profound stupidity I can answer, just pull down your pants and speak out your ass some more.

You haven't made a single argument, and you said you were the president of the United States. You sound like a man who is an expert on profound stupidity...

It's incredible that you'd post such a stupid question, but the fact that it originated on a blog you visit goes a long way to explaining why so many of you are so profoundly moronic. You are what you consume, I guess.

It's my own blog. Any more questions on the subject?

I always thought it was "socially unjust" that the Bush twins could run amok getting drunk and making asses of themselves and charge taxpayers for Secret Service to act as fixers in a jam, but keeping the President's kids safe and healthy is a perk we grant so that the Commander in Chief has one less thing to worry about, dickweed.

Yes, he does not worry about the vaccines - you are right about that - cause he gets his, and the prols can die as far as he is concerned.

And anyway, a strong supporter of preferential treatment for useful people - do you then agree that it's entirely fair and even desirable that the middle class gets far better medical service than the street bums? Do you also think that's true for their kids? I mean, shouldn't it be one of the perks for the middle class to worry less about their kids - than the bums and the neanderthals like you?

If that blog is the example of your "usefulness". You do realize it's not just "street bums" that are without health care, right? And plenty of people way more useful than you who lose what they have once they have to use it? Street bums already get health care if they avail themselves of the emergency room, and the middle class is already paying for them, you dolt. And the price to us will probably double again by the time you snooker even 1000 new people into visiting that lame excuse for a blog.

Do you believe in single payer system? Do you then support a system, where roughly 95% of the population will be getting exactly same level of medical care, irrespective of their usefulness to society (bum and engineer treated equally)?

but what you're using isn't debate, it's fallacious argument. The health care we afford the President of the United States is a given, and long-established. If you want to debate that we should do away with that perk, then argue that. My opinion is that providing a public plan that competes with the private health insurance companies is not only a benefit to those people you seem to think undeserving of health care, but a benefit to our economy and to the health of the whole nation over the long term. And although it's my opinion that a society as wealthy and advanced as ours should be at least as willing to provide an opportunity for health care to all, as they are willing to pay $400.00 per gallon of gas the military uses in Aghanistan, it is still just my opinion and has nothing to do with your argument that there's something unAmerican about the President's children getting the H1N1 vaccine before others. But I will give you credit for not claiming the vaccine itself is some Obama plot to kill "useful" people, unless you've made that argument somewhere that I missed.

Rather then ask me another moronic question, try telling me which of my views are liberal, and back it with reality based facts this time as opposed to shoving your head up your ass further and spinning yourself stupid with delusional tripe. I wont hold my breath you can manage when you’re asking such moronic questions to begin with.

No, I did not tell you I am the president of the united states. That’s your pure delusional stupidity.

Another moronic question. Gee how predictable. that you need it explained the presidents children are treated differently then others exposes you for the uneducated moron you are. While I have already explained it to you, you’re simply too stupid to grasp basic reality based facts.

No dumbass, I keep telling you you’re an insignificant uneducated loser, and tell you exactly why you’re questions are as moronic as it gets. The fact is a piss ant like you will never be smart enough to remotely grasp just how profoundly stupid you truly are.

Only the profoundly stupid would even bother to argue your basic points after that superlative smack down of right wing ass hattery.

Rather then ask me another moronic question, try telling me which of my views are liberal, and back it with reality based facts this time as opposed to shoving your head up your ass further and spinning yourself stupid with delusional tripe. I wont hold my breath you can manage when you’re asking such moronic questions to begin with.

You claimed you were not a liberal - but you cannot find a single instance when your views differ from a liberal perspective. Okay, got it.

No, I did not tell you I am the president of the united states. That’s your pure delusional stupidity.

You actually did. Let me quote what you said:

"yes, as the president of the USA I believe those kids are coming first before any other."

In this sentence you described yourself as the president of the USA. You are such a dumbass...

Another moronic question.

Because....

Gee how predictable. that you need it explained the presidents children are treated differently then others exposes you for the uneducated moron you are.

Hm. I remember it was said many times by liberals that president Bush should have sent his own kids to fight in Iraq - cause that's only fair. Moreover, your own Mickie fatass Moore was running around mocking congressmen for not sending their kids to the war in Iraq. But with president Obama - it's all different, right? Is this cause he is black, or cause he is a lib?

While I have already explained it to you, you’re simply too stupid to grasp basic reality based facts.

No, you haven't "explained" - you simply stated this as an assertion, but you failed to reason.

No dumbass, I keep telling you you’re an insignificant uneducated loser, and tell you exactly why you’re questions are as moronic as it gets.

A man who inadvertently wrote that he was the president of the United States claims that I am underucated? Hm? Well, what's your education level?

The fact is a piss ant like you will never be smart enough to remotely grasp just how profoundly stupid you truly are.

But could it be true that this describes you, not me? Say, if I am much better than you in math and physics - would it prove that it is you, who "will never be smart enough to remotely grasp just how profoundly stupid you truly are."?

Do you think it's smart?

but what you're using isn't debate, it's fallacious argument. Would you be willing to name the fallacy in my argument, or you just like the word? The health care we afford the President of the United States is a given, and long-established. Natasha and Malia are the US president? Are you sure? Moreover, it's not an argument in support of a particular policy - to say that it is long established. Just by itself, it does not prove anything. Are you against progress? If you want to debate that we should do away with that perk, then argue that. Before I argue for or against providing perks to Obama's daughters - how about we first establish moral standards. Is it fair for these two girls to jump the line for the government vaccine? Is it social justice that some kids are considered above other kids? My opinion is that providing a public plan that competes with the private health insurance companies is not only a benefit to those people you seem to think undeserving of health care, but a benefit to our economy and to the health of the whole nation over the long term. For one, the middle class families who now do enjoy private insurance, will be stuck with higher premiums and higher taxes - in short the medical care will be redistributed from them to the less deserving people. Well, I just propose this policy to include Obama and his kids - lets spread all the wealth around, not just that of the middle class. Moreover, the current medical policy is long established - how dare you question the status quo? And although it's my opinion that a society as wealthy and advanced as ours should be at least as willing to provide an opportunity for health care to all, as they are willing to pay $400.00 per gallon of gas the military uses in Aghanistan, it is still just my opinion and has nothing to do with your argument that there's something unAmerican about the President's children getting the H1N1 vaccine before others. In your mind, is it unAmerican that the children of the poor are left behind in medical treatment? Do you support the government take over of the medical insurance industry (one payer system) and having all people to have essentialyl same level of medical care? But I will give you credit for not claiming the vaccine itself is some Obama plot to kill "useful" people, unless you've made that argument somewhere that I missed. Aha. And I give you credit for now claiming that my critisism of Obama is due to the fact that he is black - unless you've made that argument somewhere that I missed.

So the President of the USA got a perk for his kids, and that is news to you?

ha ha ha ha. Come on this just BS. As are smart enough to know that most politicians give themselves perks! YES, from BOTH parties. Really there are legit issues to attack Obama and the Dems on, why Cons waste there time on childish ones is beyond me.

The fallacy is changing the subject, for one. I'm sure there are others and we all use them now and then, but I'm not that invested in analyzing your droppings, really. It's your grandiose notion that your opinion are interchangeable with proven fact.

Am I bothered that the two kids most likely to infect the President of the United States with a flu virus get vaccinated ahead of other American kids? Not at all, and I think you are a nincompoop for acting like it's an issue. I doubt I'm alone in that opinion.

"Before I argue for or against providing perks to Obama's daughters"...not what I suggested. You must argue that you're for or against such perks for ANY US President, lest you expose a racist tendency, because why would any President not be entitled to the same preference in such matters as any other President?

I skipped your reply on my opinion of health care reform, since you just gave me your opinion and added some nonesense.

"Do you support the government take over of the medical insurance industry (one payer system) and having all people to have essentialyl same level of medical care?" Do I support a one payer system? Well, yeah, but I live in the reality based world, too. You Ayn Rand utopian types should try it.

"And I give you credit for now claiming that my critisism of Obama is due to the fact that he is black". I don't see that I did that, at least no in this thread for this critisism (sic). If I did, I've been remiss! I think it is also because you don't have any real grasp of facts surrounding this or most other issues and your method of criticism consists of calling your opinions fact. But, that's just my opinion.