The point is that your "argument" had nothing to do with the topic.
The argument has nothing to do with "gay marriage being terrible because Obama didn't cut the deficit in half."
It has to do with your consistent dismissals of obviously predictable outcomes as somehow unlikely.
Obamacare adding to the deficit was completely predictable, but was somehow deemed unlikely by your crowd.
The fact that Obama was never going to cut our deficit in half was completely predictable. Yet his claims were somehow accepted as probable by your crowd.
Obama and his Chicago politicians were never going to embrace transparency, much less create the most transparent administration in history. Yet his claims were somehow accepted as probable by your crowd.
Now the fact that gay activists do not intend "marriage" as an endpoint, but rather as a manipulative means-to-an-end is completely predictable, yet somehow again it's deemed unlikely by your crowd.
Such dismissals of the obvious might have first been attributed to brianwashed ignorance, then to willful stupidity, but now it appears we've crossed the threshold to blatant duplicity.
This post was edited on 4/1 at 8:30 am