Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thank you...this thread has basically come down to:
blahblahblahblah...liberals...blahblahblahblah
Jesus, people, do any of you do your homework before posting crap like this?
DC did, and hopefully this thread will die the miserable, painful death it deserves.
There is nothing to "thank." All of sudden a handful of liberal polticians making small-time complaints is equal to policy research that compares and contrasts different Administrations' policies on drone usage and their subsequent effects on public opinion? Or what about those same politicians and their outcries during the Bush Administration? Hypocrisy anyone?
LOL
I love it when simple minds present themselves. It makes it easier to just refer back to "sheep" and call it a day.
You've never heard of a "liberal thinktank?" Then that would explain why you felt the need to link to news reports instead of actual policy research and discussions. I actually expected that you'd come through with something more material to discuss. Instead we get political talking points from a handful of politicians. Which proves my point far beyond what I thought it would.
I'm sorry, you said, and I quote:
Feel free to show us where liberals anywhere are holding the President accountable for the drone program.
You didn't say you wanted a "liberal thinktank" to weigh in. YOU used "anywhere".
And now you're trying to move the goalposts. Good luck. Your words are in black and white. I provided you with what you wanted. I proved that one commentator for Fox doesn't speak for all liberals. I've shown that many liberals have been speaking out against the drone program. That totally defuses your thread title, and proves that your "sheep" remarks are also false.
There is nothing to "thank." All of sudden a handful of liberal polticians making small-time complaints is equal to policy research that compares and contrasts different Administrations' policies on drone usage and their subsequent effects on public opinion? Or what about those same politicians and their outcries during the Bush Administration? Hypocrisy anyone?
LOL
I love it when simple minds present themselves. It makes it easier to just refer back to "sheep" and call it a day.
OH, my, first your complaint is that no liberals are disagreeing with the President. Shown you are wrong, you now are demanding "policy research that compares and contrasts different administrations' policies on drone usage and their subsequent effects on public opinion?"
You're not just moving the goalposts, you're moving them to an entirely different stadium.
Feel free to show us where liberals anywhere are holding the President accountable for the drone program.
You didn't say you wanted a "liberal thinktank" to weigh in. YOU used "anywhere".
And now you're trying to move the goalposts. Good luck. Your words are in black and white. I provided you with what you wanted. I proved that one commentator for Fox doesn't speak for all liberals. I've shown that many liberals have been speaking out against the drone program. That totally defuses your thread title, and proves that your "sheep" remarks are also false.
Quote:
Oh, and try to abstain from casual commentary of half-assed complaints from half-cocked couch bloggers.....we want to see reputable liberal dissention backed up with data and facts supporting their case.
I notice that you forgot to mention that I discounted upfront "casual commentary" from "couch-bloggers." Reputable liberal dissention is what I wanted to see. Why? Because absent any real logical research on the issue, it really doesn't matter what Jim or Tyrone or Jorge have to say if they aren't making those complaints known outside of their own manufactured blogosphere. Your act as if there are no liberal institutions that can stand up to this President. There are plenty, but yet they remain silent. Why is that?
Leave it to liberal logic to use semantics to try to contort a point. You know full well that the level of outcry aimed at this President is dismal at best, and hypocrital by monumental proportions at the very minimum. Your own links prove such.
There is nothing to "thank." All of sudden a handful of liberal polticians making small-time complaints is equal to policy research that compares and contrasts different Administrations' policies on drone usage and their subsequent effects on public opinion? Or what about those same politicians and their outcries during the Bush Administration? Hypocrisy anyone?
LOL
I love it when simple minds present themselves. It makes it easier to just refer back to "sheep" and call it a day.
No, it completely trashes the flawed premise of this thread.
OH, my, first your complaint is that no liberals are disagreeing with the President. Shown you are wrong, you now are demanding "policy research that compares and contrasts different administrations' policies on drone usage and their subsequent effects on public opinion?"
You're not just moving the goalposts, you're moving them to an entirely different stadium.
This is what I said. There were no goal posts moved. You just chose to overlook this piece:
Quote:
Oh, and try to abstain from casual commentary of half-assed complaints from half-cocked couch bloggers.....we want to see reputable liberal dissention backed up with data and facts supporting their case.
I notice that you forgot to mention that I discounted upfront "casual commentary" from "couch-bloggers."
Leave it to liberal logic to use semantics to try to contort a point. You know full well that the level of outcry aimed at this President is dismal at best, and hypocrital by monumental proportions. Your own links prove such.
I actually addressed it.
Leave it to you when you are bested to blame it on semantics.
Here's another semantics trick.
Large and poorly-defined groups where the individuals have a broad range of opinions can't be hypocritical. The breadth and range of the opinions mean that there will always be individuals within that group with completely anti-thetical opinions and perspectives.
Individuals are hypocrites when they apply a philosophy or belief system inconsistently.
Small groups with well-defined goals can be hypocritical when they hold different people to different standards for reasons that are illogical.
But amorphous groups like "liberals" or "conservatives" or even "Republicans", "Libertarians" or "Democrats" cannot be hypocritical. Only individuals within those amorphous groups can be hypocritical.
Leave it to you when you are bested to blame it on semantics.
Here's another semantics trick.
Large and poorly-defined groups where the individuals have a broad range of opinions can't be hypocritical. The breadth and range of the opinions mean that there will always be individuals within that group with completely anti-thetical opinions and perspectives.
Individuals are hypocrites when they apply a philosophy or belief system inconsistently.
Small groups with well-defined goals can be hypocritical when they hold different people to different standards for reasons that are illogical.
But amorphous groups like "liberals" or "conservatives" or even "Republicans", "Libertarians" or "Democrats" cannot be hypocritical. Only individuals within those amorphous groups can be hypocritical.
You're going to confuse them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
