[kia252]

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

"Blah blah blah...I'm a big time winner and now I'm going to entertain you all with a whole paragraph about how great I am!"

I feel I'm going to be sick...

If you want to interpret it to say that I won the argument, then that says something now, doesn't it? Seriously, I explained how debate ought to work, and if it shows that I have displayed the better argument or "won" then that says a lot.
You're just trying to whine and moan your way out of it because you can't really argue my points, and would rather resort to, unsurprisingly, an ad hominem attack. Sure, I was more than happy to send some smug right back at you when you chuck it at me, but that in no way detracts from the arguments I have made and that you are unable debate them as you want to just want to ignore or dismiss them on no grounds whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

No, because they're not following their oaths as I explained in plain King's English which you continue to blow off so you are in no position to lecture me about closed mindedness. That's just a desperate tactic to discredit me and it's not fooling anyone with a functioning brain.

You don't have to move mountains to convince me of something. I can and have been convinced for far less than that.

If you have a claim to make, then make it. Cut the politico speak, I haven't the slightest interest in that nonsense.

Seems to me "politico speak" is when someone shows that your claim is unfounded so you can disregard it as nonsense rather than try to debate it any further. This is not terribly different from your meaning of "deceitful" being anyone that is genuinely convinced they have grounds to disagree with you.

Here's the real story, paraphrased, as much as you like to muck it up:
"Everything is messed up because people willfully ignore the Constitution!"
"I disagree. Most people believe that positions they advocate are constitutional. Though they may be wrong due to misunderstanding or poor interpretation, that is not blatant ignorance."
Now, you and I have debated that claim, but now you want to pretend I never made a claim for you and I to have argued. I'm sorry, but I'm not gonna let you weasel out that way and pretend I'm the bad guy here.

Originally Posted by Lord T Hawkeye

As for Obama, check his voting record. He voted in favor of the war in Iraq and went along with just about everything Bush put foreward (I'm pretty sure he voted for the patriot act too though I'm not positive) so for him to claim "change" as being his big platform is just laughable. He's no agent of change. He's just same old same old like all before him. Nothing special whatsoever.

He may have his problems, but I thought I'd interject here that he was not a U.S. Senator when the Patriot Act was passed (2001) or when the resolution to declare war on Iraq was passed (2003). I will, however, temper that with the fact that he did vote Yea to the USA PATRIOT and Terrorism Prevention Reauthorization Act of 2005 which extended and/or expanded certain provisions of both the PATRIOT Act and the IRTPA Act of 2004, and has probably voted Yea on spending bills related to the Iraq War.