John Edwards Vanity

[Rogue]

The Breck Girl at his best. LOL
http://slate.msn.com/id/2108216/slid...8087/speed/100

[mrbiggs]

First, Bush was a cheerleader.



Second, this wasn't a very good paragraph IMHO, and I'm not even a fan of Edwards. I could have written that.

[S. Hunter]

First, Bush was a cheerleader.

So was Ronald Reagan, and very few people accuse him of well.... Anything.

Seriously though WHO CARES HOW JOHN EDWARDS DOES HIS HAIR!?

[jeff]

Ah, Rogue has time to post silly threads about Edwards' hair, but not to "put up or shut up" when asked to prove his claims, like All of those "facts" have been rebutted on the "New Information" thread.

What's the matter, Rogue, can't do it?

[Soldier]

That was entirely too long with the attendants' butt directly in the camera. I do not like big butts, and I cannot lie...

Being a cheerleader means little except that you have a crapload of energy and are quite athletic. And, for any male, are most likely surrounded by a horde of incredibly attractive and athletic females who have no problems with you hoisting them into the air by any bodily area necessary. Of course, this given male is also probably gay. If you can't figure the sarcasm from the end of that, feel free to flame me. No pun intended. See what happens when it gets late? I start rambling.

Anyway.

Yes, that does look pretty vain. But there's no reason to presume John Edwards is in any way unique in that aspect - I really don't blame him, or any candidate for public office, for that level of vanity (much as I dislike it), considering the amount of time they have to spend in the public eye. And I really don't see vanity as any indicator of character, on its own.

[Rogue]

Just thought it was funny.

What's the point Jeff. It doesn't matter how many sources I find you will dismiss them, as I will dismiss yours. I beat my against a wall for only so long. It's much more fun to discuss theory, policy and opinion. (and it takes less time researching)
BTW Jeff, did you ever respond to my scientist who believe global warming to be bunk?

[jeff]

Just thought it was funny.

Maybe it was. But I felt like busting your chops. I figured you cut and run from the other thread when told "Prove it", and I didn't feel like cutting you any slack. Drop a bomb in an argument, claiming that "my side has all the facts" and then disappear when asked to pony up the proof, you might just get a sharply worded reminder.

What's the point Jeff. It doesn't matter how many sources I find you will dismiss them, as I will dismiss yours.

Nope - you come up with something legit, and I'll pay attention. You just haven't done so yet.

I beat my against a wall for only so long. It's much more fun to discuss theory, policy and opinion. (and it takes less time researching)

Yup, it's less work, and as long as we don't have to deal with troublesome things like facts or reputable sources, we can make up an BS we like and pretend it's valid. I prefer to get some reality behind my arguments.

BTW Jeff, did you ever respond to my scientist who believe global warming to be bunk?

I apologize, but I missed any link you may have provided. Please point me to it. Do be aware that the vast majority of scientists do think there is global warming. But, I'm willing to look anyway

[Rogue]

I honestly don't recall what thread it is on. My prediction is that we would run into the my sorces vs. your souces argument. I am sure we'll get a chance some time in the future to discuss it again.
* Update the GW bunk links are in the Second debate pre-game thread

[felicote]

I like wolfowitz better in F911