Once again, I never said those words. And you know what I’m talking about:
It is rare that you participate in a political thread without being critical of Obama.
But you rarely mention the GOP – unless you are challenged to do so – in which case there is the stock “I don’t like the GOP either” response.
Examples?
Start with this thread, then go to the “Rick Perry” thread, the” Dirty Banker”, the “Obama’s Accomplishments” thread…
There’s also the handful of tea party troll types that post completely idiotic attacks on Obama: Obama’s Accomplishments so Far: #1 Offended the Queen of England…
You never have a word to say about any of that cheap partisan nonsense, but tear into Brian on just about every one of his posts, constantly attacking his lack of “facts.”
So claims of “leftists” never seem to have enough substance, but you don’t seem to question that Obama Sent his National Defense Advisor to Europe to assure them that the US will no longer treat Israel in a special manner and they might be on their own with the Muslims. (“Accomplishment” #23 – should be an item of interest to you.)
Why such different burdens of proof?
If you don’t see evidence of a bias using just these few examples, I’m just not going to bother trying to convince you beyond what I’ve written here.[/quote]
Pri: First off, you used the word “dramatically” to draw a delineation between the two. Your word and it creates a strong contrast, thus my retort.
For the record, I have offered strong rebukes to the reactionary Right trolls on this board as well, but I am also conservative in belief and principle and will therefore brace Leftists like Brian, especially when they come to the debate utterly bereft of facts and mouth the same meaningless post-structuralist nonsense ad nauseum. Brian doesn’t use facts, in fact he conspicuously avoids using them (see his “reluctant” and “lazy” Democrat argument above) and my puncturing Brian’s many and varied misstatements, untruths and prevaricating predates your quixotic sorties by a good period.
Your use of example #23 is a complete strawman. Why do I care again? Why is it an item of interest to me? I wasn’t responding to the OP in any of my posts, but neither was anyone else. Why suddenly bring up #23? It isn’t germane, but you seem to be trying to use it to make a point. Does my not questioning #23, which I’ve ever never even paid any attention to before, suddenly constitute some sort of tacit support?
As to burdens of proof: What the hell are you talking about? You’re now seeking evidentiary value for statements made on the board?
As to you not bothering to convince me: PLEASE! Stop trying to convince me! I’m good with it. Really.
