• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Whataboutism and the Unreasonable Left

Tigerace117 said:
Actually, it is a reflection of the Trump cult’s total inability to face reality and endless appetite for deflecting away from whatever subject matter is at hand to shriek “but Clinton” or “but Obama”.
Click to expand...

The left does it too, just saying.
 
First Reply - There is no argument - I stated facts You do not understand - Simple.

Second Reply - You admit you cannot understand.

Third Reply - You Remain the Case in Point.


The Last word is yours - Good bye.
 
trouble13 said:
Actually I flat out ignore you for obvious reasons. If you approached any conversation with a shred of intellectual integrity you would get a different result.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Thank you for the vague "nuh uh you're a liar" post. I cant help but feel you cut and ran from my posts exactly because of the intelligence and integrity with which I responded to your posts. Here's the post that made you cut and run from a thread you started

Vern said:
well trouble, if you want to try to justify trump being a pathological liar then you should at least find a lie from President Obama. Its not a lie for Susan Rice to read incorrect CIA talking points. And I have to chuckle, “wah wah Bush didn’t lie, the CIA was wrong” seems to be the lying conservative narrative to excuse bush for lying us into Iraq. Sure you had other excuses such as "er uh we found WMDs" and "something something 9-11" but "golly, the CIA was wrong" was the excuse you guys settled on. anyhoo, this is me proving what you posted is not a lie.


Rice claimed, in her appearances, that the attack had grown out of a spontaneous protest against the anti-Islam film Innocence of Muslims. She didn't make this up; it was the CIA's assessment at the time.

But this claim turned out to be wrong. While some of the attackers really were incensed by the film, closed circuit footage from the diplomatic building showed that there was no protest.

https://www.vox.com/2015/10/12/9489389/benghazi-explained

And the memo was loaded with qualifiers. That alone shreds your "narrative". So now you have to decide to cling to the lie or admit its not a lie. Now if you cling to the lie you then need to admit that 3000 Americans died, 10s of thousands were injured and hundreds of thousands Iraqis died because Bush lied because that's your standard (fyi, he did lie but your standard is "said something that wasn't true").
Click to expand...
 
enderpotato00 said:
The left does it too, just saying.
Click to expand...

But nowhere near the same level as what conservatives do.

Like I said before, people seem utterly incapable of making an argument without going "but Obama" or "but Clinton".
 
Vern said:
Thank you for the vague "nuh uh you're a liar" post. I cant help but feel you cut and ran from my posts exactly because of the intelligence and integrity with which I responded to your posts. Here's the post that made you cut and run from a thread you started
Click to expand...

Rather than attack me with empty snide one liners, by all means present an argument. I am more than willing to engage a position of substance.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Rather than attack me with empty snide one liners, by all means present an argument. I am more than willing to engage a position of substance.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You keep patting yourself of the back but you don't address my posts. Pointing out that President Obama didn't lie was a position of substance. Pointing out you tried to use your incorrect opinion to justify Trump's pathological lying was a position of substance. Pointing out that your "magic" standard of lying didn't apply to Bush and that bush actually lied us into Iraq was a position of substance. Its why you cut and ran. So I'm simply pointing out that your self compliments are false. So yes, you "flat out ignore me for obvious reasons". I'm obviously posting facts.
 
Last edited:
<alt>doxygen said:
I'm ignoring the whataboutObama stuff in your post...

Trump said most of the Fed employees affected by the shutdown were Democrats. Did you miss that little nugget? I've seen analysis that shows him to be off in that statement, but it gets into the weeds of parsing "affected", and I don't want to go there. The point is what Trump said his EO did. That explains his intent.
Click to expand...

So, in your expert analysis, Trump's action has absolutely NOTHING at all to do with the security of the Southern Border as he perceives it? It is only an attack on Democrat Federal Government Employees.

I thought for sure that I heard something about the Southern Border in all of this. But, I guess not. Thanks for getting me squared away on this.

Once again, Trump says one thing pretty clearly, but but Liberals KNOW that what he actually says is only a lie. Liberals know what he actually means even if their knowledge makes no sense and runs counter to the real world.

Even if it is exactly the opposite of what he said or exactly the opposite of what his debating opponents are responding to.

Thank God we have Liberal Never Trumpers to act as our Oracles.
 
lwf said:
The onus is not on me to fix your argument.



The conclusion was "Therefore, any/all discussion containing logical thought, is likely to be a 'trigger' used to terminate the flow of ideas." You are correct in that I cannot understand how you made the logical leap from your premises to this conclusion. I also contend than no one else does either.



I prefer to point out faulty reasoning when I see it. I view it as my little way of performing a small service to the world.
Click to expand...


-------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by BlueElk
You contend several valid premises are missing, however, because this is untrue, You fail to identify any, and are prepared to offer more unsound thoughts.

- lwf - RESPONSE -
The onus is not on me to fix your argument.



Originally Posted by BlueElk
For You to Understand, You need several premises that You can't even imagine, because You have only unsound thoughts (YOUR WORDS), required to lead You to the conclusion that You have yet to identify.


- lwf - RESPONSE -
The conclusion was "Therefore, any/all discussion containing logical thought, is likely to be a 'trigger' used to terminate the flow of ideas." You are correct in that I cannot understand how you made the logical leap from your premises to this conclusion. I also contend than no one else does either.



Originally Posted by BlueElk
Let it go - My Post is a Statement of Fact and this Thread has become a Case in Point.


- lwf - RESPONSE -
I prefer to point out faulty reasoning when I see it. I view it as my little way of performing a small service to the world.



- BLUE ELK REPLY - (sorry for the delay - got side tracked - miss sent reply)

First Reply - There is no argument - I stated facts You do not understand - Simple.

Second Reply - You admit you cannot understand.

Third Reply - You Remain the Case in Point.


The Last word is yours - Good bye.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom