Skip to main content

View Diary: Professor Droney (468 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  it would depend on how they were used (0+ / 0-)

    as I had absolutely no trust in Bush even before he was elected I'd have had huge reservations but do you really think Bush wouldn't have used drones if he had them?

    Because the first drone strikes did take place under him and technology will keep progressing with drones and in general

    •  uh oh, you used the t word ! (14+ / 0-)

      cool. so the next time we have a GOP POTUS -  who will be equally able to utilize these powers that are now being codified by this Dem one - we can count on you to yell your head off about it?


      If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution. ~ Emma Goldman

      by Lady Libertine on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 07:46:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's how the executive branch has become (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        TheLizardKing, jdsnebraska

        where it holds more and more discrency power. Perhaps Congress should take back it's power but with as broken as it is I am not sure how that would be much better

        it's not as simple as you want to make it

        •  It's as simple as torture. Of course, some people (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          corvo, CT Hank

          tried to pretend that was complex too.

          "I have often seen people uncivil by too much civility, and tiresome in their courtesy." Michel de Montaigne

          by JesseCW on Mon Feb 11, 2013 at 01:50:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

            •  You don't even know the difference between analogy (0+ / 0-)

              and strawman, SERIOUSLY?

              He didn't say YOU pretended torture was "complex".

              He said PEOPLE did... just like YOU said this issue was "not simple"...

              True, it was to deride your position as equally ridiculous as that of those people on torture... but through analogy, not strawman.

              You're long past being a faithful participant in this discussion.

              •  passive aggressive semantics (0+ / 0-)

                it was a reply to me and they made no attempt to clarify thus it's perfectly logical to conclude that 'people' includes me

                And what you are doing is as I said, passive aggressive semantics

                •  It's not passive aggresive sementics to point out (0+ / 0-)

                  when someone is egregiously wrong in their dismissal or anothers argument.

                  And the analogy wasn't vague at all.

                  Or what, pray tell, should have been done with your accusation of "nice" strawman ("nicely" setting the tone there, mind you)? Should it not have been called out as wrong? Or was it the manner in which it was called out?

                  So was I wrong to call you wrong? Or did the manner in which I did it hurt your feefees?

                  •  considering it wasn't wrong (0+ / 0-)

                    it would be 'nice' for you to actually engage what I said instead of some false construct that makes you feel better

                    But I certainly will not be holding my breath on that

                    And you? A random nobody on the internet hurt my feelings? Most hilarious thing I've heard all day. Don't you worry your pretty little head about that. I'm just disappointed by the demonstration of closed minded dogmatism being displayed in what should be a mature 'forum'. The only thing 'hurt' were my expectations but no worries those are easily adjusted.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site