[rbmillerjr]

“Interesting that you call me a weak debater when you have not even begun to address the historic factors in the election”

Actually, when there is agreement on a point in a debate, there is certainly no need to debate that point.

We have agreement there there were many factors that led to the Dem route. Your reluctance to find any blame on the sitting US President is astonishing. Emotionalism from a liberal or a conservative is still emotionalism.

[meandog]

NY Times now gets on board Bush train as Laura also praises Mrs. Obama along with Ms. Sotomayor click here

[ohioWfan]

It is not in any way "emotionalism" to refute the extremity of blame being foisted by many on this thread.

I would counter your attack on me by saying that many posting here have any unhealthy emotional disdain for President Bush.

I have, in all my posts, been completely rational and have used facts in my arguments. Check the posts of others here, and you will see what you accuse me of doing is what those opposing my POV have indeed done.

btw, your "agreement" was not really agreement, was it? "Other factors?" They were the prime factors.

I don't believe we agree, because you center the blame on President Bush while relegating the more significant factors as "other."

That's not agreement, and to be a good debater, you should address the vast difference in our arguments. Instead, you have ignored it.