Who was also Gov of California for 8 years...Turquoise wrote:
One of the most popular presidents was a "Hollywood actor."[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Matt Damon is a good actor... but once again it's another hollywood idiot who needs to stick to acting
This would be fun to watch though
No, but I'm thankful for the opportunity to listen to another mans opinion. The fact that they might do this one on one sounds great.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Just for the record, do you think we should be thankful to Bush, because he won the Iraq war?Kmarion wrote:
I don't know hot shot.. let's say we listen to the debate instead of being all "omg leik lol".
What's wrong with listening?
It is true that Reagan was experienced before running for president, but entering a debate is nowhere near as demanding as being president.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Who was also Gov of California for 8 years...Turquoise wrote:
One of the most popular presidents was a "Hollywood actor."[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Matt Damon is a good actor... but once again it's another hollywood idiot who needs to stick to acting
This would be fun to watch though
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
I'm sure Matt is a good guy and good to his family... but he has less credentials than Sarah P to debate anyone lol
Damon is an idiot... he demonstrated that when he completely missed the boat in trying to explain (what he thought was) her religious views.Turquoise wrote:
It is true that Reagan was experienced before running for president, but entering a debate is nowhere near as demanding as being president.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Who was also Gov of California for 8 years...Turquoise wrote:
One of the most popular presidents was a "Hollywood actor."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
I'm sure Matt is a good guy and good to his family... but he has less credentials than Sarah P to debate anyone lol
The fact that Palin is so clueless yet governor shows that experience isn't everything.
I'd figure Damon could beat her in a debate as well, and probably much easier than against Kristol.
I think she missed the boat with all of her views.Kmarion wrote:
Damon is an idiot... he demonstrated that when he completely missed the boat in trying to explain (what he thought was) her religious views.Turquoise wrote:
It is true that Reagan was experienced before running for president, but entering a debate is nowhere near as demanding as being president.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Who was also Gov of California for 8 years...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
I'm sure Matt is a good guy and good to his family... but he has less credentials than Sarah P to debate anyone lol
The fact that Palin is so clueless yet governor shows that experience isn't everything.
I'd figure Damon could beat her in a debate as well, and probably much easier than against Kristol.
Careful, you don't want to end up in a debate with him because you called him an idiot.Kmarion wrote:
Damon is an idiot... he demonstrated that when he completely missed the boat in trying to explain (what he thought was) her religious views.
Prove it to me.Kmarion wrote:
Damon is an idiot... he demonstrated that when he completely missed the boat in trying to explain (what he thought was) her religious views.Turquoise wrote:
It is true that Reagan was experienced before running for president, but entering a debate is nowhere near as demanding as being president.[TUF]Catbox wrote:
Who was also Gov of California for 8 years...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
I'm sure Matt is a good guy and good to his family... but he has less credentials than Sarah P to debate anyone lol
The fact that Palin is so clueless yet governor shows that experience isn't everything.
I'd figure Damon could beat her in a debate as well, and probably much easier than against Kristol.
It was a fucking parody.. I think many of this sites members still take at face value."On oil exploration and drilling in the ANWR:
God made dinosaurs 4,000 years ago as ultimately flawed creatures, lizards of Satan really, so when they died and became petroleum products we, made in his perfect image, could use them in our pickup trucks, snow machines and fishing boats."
Damon is making fun of Creationism, just like that other guy did.Kmarion wrote:
He actually took this literally:It was a fucking parody.. I think many of this sites members still take at face value."On oil exploration and drilling in the ANWR:
God made dinosaurs 4,000 years ago as ultimately flawed creatures, lizards of Satan really, so when they died and became petroleum products we, made in his perfect image, could use them in our pickup trucks, snow machines and fishing boats."
http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?o … Itemid=104
Parody source ^^
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_Sarah_Pa … _years_ago
No he is not. He is in all seriousness trying to claim that she is a literalist. Don't play stupid Turq, it doesn't fit you.Turquoise wrote:
Damon is making fun of Creationism, just like that other guy did.Kmarion wrote:
He actually took this literally:It was a fucking parody.. I think many of this sites members still take at face value."On oil exploration and drilling in the ANWR:
God made dinosaurs 4,000 years ago as ultimately flawed creatures, lizards of Satan really, so when they died and became petroleum products we, made in his perfect image, could use them in our pickup trucks, snow machines and fishing boats."
http://www.thomhartmann.com/index.php?o … Itemid=104
Parody source ^^
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_Sarah_Pa … _years_ago
Palin might not conclusively be a Creationist, but she associates with them, and considering that crazy demon protection thing she was involved in with the weird African preacher, I'd say it's safe to assume she's not too sane.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28 … religion28Turquoise wrote:
Palin might not conclusively be a Creationist, but she associates with them, and considering that crazy demon protection thing she was involved in with the weird African preacher, I'd say it's safe to assume she's not too sane.
Let's assume you're right. He makes a wrong assumption about Palin in a random interview. Somehow, that makes him a total idiot?Kmarion wrote:
No he is not. He is in all seriousness trying to claim that she is a literalist. Don't play stupid Turq, it doesn't fit you.
Last edited by Turquoise (2009-01-26 16:47:44)
The article is wrong.. misinterpreted.. then again it is the LA Times.TheAussieReaper wrote:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28 … religion28Turquoise wrote:
Palin might not conclusively be a Creationist, but she associates with them, and considering that crazy demon protection thing she was involved in with the weird African preacher, I'd say it's safe to assume she's not too sane.
She wanted to push for Intelligent Design.
Got any proof on that too?Kmarion wrote:
The article is wrong.. misinterpreted.. then again it is the LA Times.TheAussieReaper wrote:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28 … religion28Turquoise wrote:
Palin might not conclusively be a Creationist, but she associates with them, and considering that crazy demon protection thing she was involved in with the weird African preacher, I'd say it's safe to assume she's not too sane.
She wanted to push for Intelligent Design.
So Damon was an idiot because he was 2000 years out on her insane ideas?TheAussieReaper wrote:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28 … religion28Turquoise wrote:
Palin might not conclusively be a Creationist, but she associates with them, and considering that crazy demon protection thing she was involved in with the weird African preacher, I'd say it's safe to assume she's not too sane.
She wanted to push for Intelligent Design.
Assume? Are still trying to say Damon wasn't being serious?Turquoise wrote:
Let's assume you're right. He makes a wrong assumption about Palin in a random interview. Somehow, that makes him a total idiot?Kmarion wrote:
No he is not. He is in all seriousness trying to claim that she is a literalist. Don't play stupid Turq, it doesn't fit you.
The rest of my post IS relevant. And so is the one that Aussie just posted.
Palin is the idiot.
Kmarion wrote:
Baited? wtf.. How insecure is a person that feels he has to call someone an idiot because he has a different viewpoint?
Instead of name calling why not a scholarly debate?
Kmarion wrote:
Matt Damon is an uniformed douche.
lolKmarion wrote:
Damon is an idiot...
Don't forget the LA times article, which is just "wrong" and "misinterpreted". lolKmarion wrote:
Yes, if he can be misled by a lefty INTERNET BLOG JOKE, he is an idiot.
Gee, because you're so willing to listen?..lolTurquoise wrote:
Got any proof on that too?Kmarion wrote:
The article is wrong.. misinterpreted.. then again it is the LA Times.TheAussieReaper wrote:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28/nation/na-palinreligion28
She wanted to push for Intelligent Design.
To be honest, I think a lot of people were under the impression that she thought that. I certainly heard that several times. As did the LA Times. Possible he just read that, given that he lives in LA and all.Kmarion wrote:
Assume? Are still trying to say Damon wasn't being serious?Turquoise wrote:
Let's assume you're right. He makes a wrong assumption about Palin in a random interview. Somehow, that makes him a total idiot?Kmarion wrote:
No he is not. He is in all seriousness trying to claim that she is a literalist. Don't play stupid Turq, it doesn't fit you.
The rest of my post IS relevant. And so is the one that Aussie just posted.
Palin is the idiot.
Yes, if he can be misled by a lefty INTERNET BLOG JOKE, he is an idiot.
No it's not relevant. Let me remind you, we are talking about Matt Damon said and how utterly wrong he was.
Again, what's more idiotic? Being misled by an internet article or believing in a ridiculous interpretation of religion?Kmarion wrote:
Assume? Are still trying to say Damon wasn't being serious?Turquoise wrote:
Let's assume you're right. He makes a wrong assumption about Palin in a random interview. Somehow, that makes him a total idiot?Kmarion wrote:
No he is not. He is in all seriousness trying to claim that she is a literalist. Don't play stupid Turq, it doesn't fit you.
The rest of my post IS relevant. And so is the one that Aussie just posted.
Palin is the idiot.
Yes, if he can be misled by a lefty INTERNET BLOG JOKE, he is an idiot.
No it's not relevant. Let me remind you, we are talking about Matt Damon said and how utterly wrong he was.
It quotes some guy. Which whilst not overwhelming proof, it's more than you're currently offering.Kmarion wrote:
Gee, because you're so willing to listen?..lolTurquoise wrote:
Got any proof on that too?Kmarion wrote:
The article is wrong.. misinterpreted.. then again it is the LA Times.
The article itself doesn't offer any real proof.
I think he is an idiot and I've said why.TheAussieReaper wrote:
Kmarion wrote:
Baited? wtf.. How insecure is a person that feels he has to call someone an idiot because he has a different viewpoint?
Instead of name calling why not a scholarly debate?Kmarion wrote:
Matt Damon is an uniformed douche.lolKmarion wrote:
Damon is an idiot...Don't forget the LA times article, which is just "wrong" and "misinterpreted". lolKmarion wrote:
Yes, if he can be misled by a lefty INTERNET BLOG JOKE, he is an idiot.