The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #150244 Message #3500493
Posted By: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
08-Apr-13 - 11:40 AM
Thread Name: BS: Obama Hate Thread...
Subject: RE: BS: Obama Hate Thread...
Here Bobert, lets go in baby steps.....
"With THREE links(two provided by me, and one of them was the search page with multiple sites), and Babette says that N.G. is dodging the question, when he's been repeatedly hit with the answers....(given by those you pretend to not understand).
Like right now!..You are dodging..and pretending....so who do you ask??..the other 'Great Pretender'!
(continuing)...."and then they turn around in a glazed eye stupor, try to change the subject,"
Like you are trying to do AGAIN, right now!
(Continuing).."and accuse the people giving them the answers, of being 'haters' bigots, and other names from the 'so-called liberal' play book."
So, when people are giving you answers that don't fit into your propaganda indoctrination, (built on lies from Party bosses), you accuse them of being 'haters' and 'bigots', and anything else the usual tactical, worn out, hollow 'play book'. This is because shallow, 'so-called liberals' don't seem to be able to think for themselves, use name calling, as to TRY to discredit, whomever they are talking to, whenever they are cornered and have to confront the truth. They do this because the 'excuse department' ran out of truth and/or logic...so all you got is some lame-ass accusation tossing, hung over from the '60's to try to discredit them....(is that clear enough?)
(continuing)..."Now I didn't make this stuff up....it's all there, for all to see....and then they go blind..."I diddent see it"
Just scroll back and read the posts....you guys do this over and over again, and then when the person whom you FALSELY accuse, by 'name calling', object, and fire back, you try to paint them as a nasty, mean person...and claim something stupid like 'You didn't understand it' or '..it wasn't said clearly enough'(LIKE NOW)...or, you just go on, as if nobody asked you a question about something you posted about your positions!
(Continuing)..."Now come on, if being a dedicated liberal, or conservative relies on this kind of blatant dishonest tactic, how can the 'cause' be anything less than deceptive????"
(Continuing)..."you say its white..they say it's black...you say the sky is blue...they say magenta .....you post an article...they don't agree with WHO the source was....you provide a variety of sources...they blame Bush, and call you a name.
Boy, where do I sign up....you guys have sold me!!...(rolls eyes)
Always arguing over nothing but the smallest anecdotal 'points', and taking the reverse argument, even when it is not the point being talked about....so, to clarify, the person who you are talking with provides a link, to back up what they are saying, and for you to comment on. Then you start trying to discredit the source, even if the story is truthful, but you don't like what is being said....or, it refutes your position...or, sheds light on something that you don't want to hear, believe, or embarrasses you to the 'reading audience'.....then, the big escape hatch: Blame Bush!.....Sorry, I know Bush was a disaster, but Obama, when elected, had Congress(both houses) but did NOTHING, but push his Obamacare through, which is more of a massive amount of governmental control over the people than anything near 'health care'. He could have done SOMETHING to undo what Bush had done, or he could have reversed some of Bush's 'Executive Orders'...but NO..he did the same fucking things along the same fucking path...up to, and including NDAA!!!!!
Now, with this bit of lame bullshit, along with your 'head in the sand tactics', you want to try to 'entice' people to your position?????
FUCK NO!!..It is not only dishonest, it's lame! Why would anyone 'come over' to an indefensible, dishonest point of view...especially when the proponents of that view act so childish, as a result of holding that view????????
(Too much reading for ya' huh?....next you'll claim fatigue)
These!..I hope that wasn't too strenuous for you two.
Care to comment on the TOPIC?? as per aforementioned?? (Now that you 'should' have had it made clear??