Skip to main content

View Diary: McClatchy Reporters Reveal the Dissemblance of Cheney's Mushroom Cloud II Speech (255 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That's not at all what I'm suggesting. (0+ / 0-)

    Like a typical Obama apologist, though, you have your idées fixes and then you mischaracterize other people's criticisms in an effort to escape having to address them.

    You could have said that more forceful criticism of the previous administration would be "a distraction we don't need" and then you'd be disagreeing but accurately referencing my criticism. Then we could have had an actual discussion of whether it would be a distraction or a necessary and politcally smart foundation for going forward.

    But you didn't. Instead, you have dishonestly characterized my position three times: "Playing on Cheney's terms," high-profile pissing matches," and going "mano à mano with Cheney."

    Like most Obama apologists, you just can't bring yourself to address criticism of Obama honestly so you distort what other people are saying in order to make it look ridiculous and then say it's ridiculous. That technique has gotten very old and tired.

    Secrecy? Letting torturers off the hook? Military Commissions? Trillions to Wall Street? Mountain top removal? Change we can believe in, my ASS!

    by expatjourno on Fri May 22, 2009 at 10:31:05 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  what's a "typical Obama apologist"? (0+ / 0-)

      For someone who professes a desire for "actual discussion", your debating skills leave a lot to be desired. You claim, twice, that i'm an "Obama apologist", as if that somehow negates my point. You deride my "technique" of "distortion" without any evidence of same. You shout, "straw man!", though, clearly, you don't really understand the term.

      Perhaps english isn't your first language, so i'll just let it go at that.

      "They're telling us something we don't understand"
      General Charles de Gaulle, Mai '68

      by subtropolis on Sat May 23, 2009 at 11:23:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You first accused me of advocating "playing on... (0+ / 0-)

        ...Cheney's terms" and "high-profile pissing matches." That is a straw man argument, i.e., opposing a position that your opponent is not holding. And evidence that you have distorted my position, which was:

        Yep. Because Obama won't stand up to him. (5+ / 0-)
        He won't tell the truth about Bush and Cheney, which would discredit them. Just wants to be all touchy-feely and sing Kumbayah with the Republicans. Disgusting.

        Of COURSE Cheney's polling is up. He's being treated with kid gloves.

        Secrecy? Letting torturers off the hook? Military Commissions? Trillions to Wall Street? Mountain top removal? Change we can believe in, my ASS!

        by expatjourno on Fri May 22, 2009 at 03:20:20 PM SWT
        [ Parent | Reply to This ]

        QED

        You are the one lacking evidence, understanding of the term straw man and knowledge of the English language.

        After lying about my position three times, you are not entitled to courtesy, so if you don't like being called an Obama apologist, you can kiss my ass in Macy's window.

        Secrecy? Letting torturers off the hook? Military Commissions? Trillions to Wall Street? Mountain top removal? Change we can believe in, my ASS!

        by expatjourno on Sat May 23, 2009 at 01:56:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site