Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: Offensive

  1. #1

    Offensive

    “And the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the secretary of state, our U.N. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we’ve lost four of our own, governor, is offensive.”

    — Barack Obama,
    second debate, Oct. 16

    I've noticed that when Obama is lying or trying to cover something up he will often call the question "offensive". The above line is a clear example. Also when he was asked about the national security leaks coming out of his administration he used the exact same wording. Said finds the idea that he would leak national security secrets for political points "offensive".

    Since both things are absolutely true it appears that we found Obama's poker tell. When he calls the question offensive it is a sign that the accusation is true.

  2. #2
    How a Liberal Answers a Hard Question:

    1. "Is that a serious question", followed by an eyeroll, and no answer.

    2. "Frankly, I'm offended anyone would aks that question", followed bya scowl and no answer.

    How a Liberal Describes a Republican:

    1. "He's far too extreme." regardless of what the Republican actually supports or says.

    2. "I can't say what I think/I don't want to get into what I really think (RACIST!!! SEXIST!!! BIGOT!!!!), but we all know that X is just code on the right (FOR RACISM!!!!!!!!)", followed by a knowing look and a wink wink, nod nod to the reporter.

    3. "He's waging a War on (fill in the victim class of choice)" followed by a smug knowing look.

  3. #3

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    How a Liberal Answers a Hard Question:

    1. "Is that a serious question", followed by an eyeroll, and no answer.

    2. "Frankly, I'm offended anyone would aks that question", followed bya scowl and no answer.

    How a Liberal Describes a Republican:

    1. "He's far too extreme." regardless of what the Republican actually supports or says.

    2. "I can't say what I think/I don't want to get into what I really think (RACIST!!! SEXIST!!! BIGOT!!!!), but we all know that X is just code on the right (FOR RACISM!!!!!!!!)", followed by a knowing look and a wink wink, nod nod to the reporter.

    3. "He's waging a War on (fill in the victim class of choice)" followed by a smug knowing look.


    Your right. It's only liberals and Dems. Wow. I see so clearly now. If the world only had conservatives and republicans we'd be free from scandal and political cover ups.


    Liberals are all bad. Dems are all bad. Conservatives are good. Republicans are good.



    This forum is strange.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    Your right. It's only liberals and Dems. Wow. I see so clearly now. If the world only had conservatives and republicans we'd be free from scandal and political cover ups.


    Liberals are all bad. Dems are all bad. Conservatives are good. Republicans are good.



    This forum is strange.
    TLDR: You can't actually deny that they say (regularly) the things I posted, so instead you'll straw man a "All Libs are bad, all Cons are good" argument I don't, and never have, made.

    Nothing strange about a Straw Man deflection of an unpleasant political truth.

    By the way, when you get some time, you should check out the list of questions the "View" asked Mr. & Ms. Obama, and compare it with the questions the "View" asked Ms. Romney. Very enlightening and illustrative of the two-standards system employed by most of our media (other than the dreaded FOX of course). Very enlightening.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    TLDR: You can't actually deny that they say (regularly) the things I posted, so instead you'll straw man a "All Libs are bad, all Cons are good" argument I don't, and never have, made.

    Nothing strange about a Straw Man deflection of an unpleasant political truth.

    By the way, when you get some time, you should check out the list of questions the "View" asked Mr. & Ms. Obama, and compare it with the questions the "View" asked Ms. Romney. Very enlightening and illustrative of the two-standards system employed by most of our media (other than the dreaded FOX of course). Very enlightening.
    It isn't a straw man if your post illustrates It.

    Your examples really fit all politicians. Dodging questions. Pretend outrage. Using terms like war on ----- but you prescribe it as solely the practice of liberals.


    We all get if Fish. You hate liberals and Dems. Don't be upset though when obvious bias is obvious.


    And the View? That's the standard bearer now? I haven't seen it but I will have no issue with agreeing with you that the view softballed the Obamas and hardballed the Romneys.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    It isn't a straw man if your post illustrates It.

    Your examples really fit all politicians. Dodging questions. Pretend outrage. Using terms like war on ----- but you prescribe it as solely the practice of liberals.

    We all get if Fish. You hate liberals and Dems. Don't be upset though when obvious bias is obvious.
    More dodging of the issue, and attacking of me. Cause what I, Libertarian Third Party Voter, thinks really matter, amirite my lifelong (D) voting friend?

    And no, I don't hate classic liberalism, and the ideals of personal liberty and freedom from oppression it reflected.

    I hate modern, political correctness/thought police, collectivist/redistributionist, divisionist (race/gender/ethnicity/sexuality) power hungry "progressives" that in most policy ways reflect the same things and say the same things I enjoyed reading about the Russian Revolution circa 1918. Those who don't read history are doomed to not know they're repeating it.

    Oh, and for the record, nowhere in my post did I say anything about (R) one way or the other, inclusive or exclusive. Thats simply your biased take, not what I wrote. If you'd like, I can write a hole other post lambasting what (R) tends to say in tough spots.

    And the View? That's the standard bearer now? I haven't seen it but I will have no issue with agreeing with you that the view softballed the Obamas and hardballed the Romneys.
    Of course you havn't seen it. Nor will you (I'd guess) care if you do (which you won't). Because you don't give a rats ass about bias, as long as it supports your side, your party, your guy.

    And yes, the "View" is a part of the media. While it's no "standard" (and what is, eaxactly, the standard in the media to you?) it's reflective of how most of the non-FOX media acts. FOX does it as well, just the other way round.

  8. #8
    He isn't outraged about an administration that leaks national security secrets for political points. No biggie, everyone does it. I don't personally recall it ever happening before but who knows.

    He isn't outraged about a cover up of a terror attack for political purposes. We know through sworn testimony before congress that the State Department and the Oval Office were well aware of what happened there. They watched it go down in real time for goodness sake. The attack took hours. There was no fast response team sent to rescue the folks in the compound. Requests for assistance appear to have been denied. Why?

    No outrage for that, everyone does it right? Well no actually we have never really seen anything like this.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    More dodging of the issue, and attacking of me. Cause what I, Libertarian Third Party Voter, thinks really matter, amirite my lifelong (D) voting friend?

    I had to stop here. You need to believe this don't you. Even though t isn't true. Even though I have stated otherwise. Because it helps you ignore anything I say. I'm a dem in your eyes. A liberal. So is anyone left of you. Anyone. He'll Doggen is a left leaning liberal to you.



    In your world the only way ican think how I do is if I am a lifelong D voter. Laughable.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    He isn't outraged about an administration that leaks national security secrets for political points. No biggie, everyone does it. I don't personally recall it ever happening before but who knows.

    He isn't outraged about a cover up of a terror attack for political purposes. We know through sworn testimony before congress that the State Department and the Oval Office were well aware of what happened there. They watched it go down in real time for goodness sake. The attack took hours. There was no fast response team sent to rescue the folks in the compound. Requests for assistance appear to have been denied. Why?

    No outrage for that, everyone does it right? Well no actually we have never really seen anything like this.

    I was outraged. When the bush administration did it. Now I'm a bit numb. Obama is Bush. I can admit that freely. We have had 12 years o the same President. Probably on our way to 4 more.

    Of course you have reasons to excuse Bush and have outrage for Obama. R trumps D. I get that.


    I'm not voting for Obama. I just don't get outraged anymore. Because yes, they all do it.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    20,136
    No worries.

    Anybody with a brain saw right through that.

    He has the audacity to say that he is offended. How about the families of the victims?

    Mr. Obama, we are all offended that you think we are idiots.

    Another thing that I got mentioned in the second debate that I hope resurfaces in the final debate is Fast and Furious. I have seen very little media (even FOX) mentioning that Romney brought it up. Obama did not even respond to it in the debate, he was hoping it would pass over and it did.

    Benghazi
    Fast and Furious
    Fort Hood

    What happened Mr. President?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    Because it helps you ignore anything I say.
    Piney, if I wanted to ignore eveything you say, I'd simply add you to the guys on my ignore list.

    I'm a dem in your eyes. A liberal. So is anyone left of you. Anyone. He'll Doggen is a left leaning liberal to you.
    Yes, it is my opinion (based on your posting histories) that you and Doggin are Liberals/Liberal in your politics and policy positions, generally speaking. For the record, Doggin is well aware I consider him a liberal. As with all things though, there are degrees of left and right. But we're limited by the language in that liberals/progressives are the term for both lightly left and strongly left in american politics. If you'd like to encourage your far-left to start describing themselves as collectivists/communists, I'd be happy to use those terms instead. Tillt hen, liberal is what we have to use.

    Now, if you'd like to correct me, and cite all the Republican Presidents you've voted for, and all the strongly conservative policy positions you actively support, by all means, do so. But generally speaking, my recollection (faulty though it certainly could be) is that you are a somewhat down-the-line liberal policy supporter.



    What you've done here, though, is make a clear effort to change teh topic from "this is how liberals dodge questions they don't want to answer" to a far less important "Warfish is a one-sided Con lover".

    Now, if you're not a liberal, why derail the topic, instead of addressing the topic head on and ignoring me? Even if the Republicans use the exact same langauge, that does not justify or validate that Democrats do. So pointing it out, and hammering me, is 100% irrelevant to the topic at hand.

    In other words, it's exactly what I'd expect a liberal supporter to do to move teh thread away form the laughable "I'm offended" common non-answer, to a more comfortable "both sides do it, but your side is worse because YOU didn't mention that your side does it too!" line of argument.

    I was outraged. When the bush administration did it. Now I'm a bit numb.
    /chuckle

    I am sure you are.
    Last edited by Warfish; 10-19-2012 at 01:04 PM.

  13. #13
    warfish stuff

    My Pres vote history is Perot Clinton Bush Badnarik Obama. This year if Gary Johnson is not on the ballot I'm writing him in.

    I am against gun laws, I'd like a flat tax, I believe in smart and lean govt. I was against the patriot act. Against creating the DHS. I am for enforcing immigration law but also for a practical way to do it. I do believe in a universal healthcare standard. I'd probably agree to end almost every subsidy you could throw at me.

    I don't know what else. I guess if you asked me straight forward I'd answer honestly. That's all I can really do.

    I vote mostly R or I on local elections. I did vote for Cuomo though.

    My purpose wasn't to defend liberals. Although you won't believe me. I find you to be a poster with more integrity that most. You normally don't walk down a party line. However when you say something like the post I criticized I find it to be intellectually dishonest. You know that every sample you decided was typical liberal was really typical (fill n party here) stuff.

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    How a Liberal Answers a Hard Question:

    1. "Is that a serious question", followed by an eyeroll, and no answer.

    2. "Frankly, I'm offended anyone would aks that question", followed bya scowl and no answer.

    How a Liberal Describes a Republican:

    1. "He's far too extreme." regardless of what the Republican actually supports or says.

    2. "I can't say what I think/I don't want to get into what I really think (RACIST!!! SEXIST!!! BIGOT!!!!), but we all know that X is just code on the right (FOR RACISM!!!!!!!!)", followed by a knowing look and a wink wink, nod nod to the reporter.

    3. "He's waging a War on (fill in the victim class of choice)" followed by a smug knowing look.
    Nice.

    You use a strawman argument, then call out someone for doing the same exact thing one post later.

    Classic.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    Nice.

    You use a strawman argument, then call out someone for doing the same exact thing one post later.

    Classic.
    A. If I felt like making the effort (which I don't for you PK, sorry), I could youtube link each of the lines I listed being spoken by a prominant Democrat elected official. Hence, not a strawman.

    B. Piney was calling ME out, not the Politicians this thread is about. His strawman is the claim that I was saying:

    "Your right. It's only liberals and Dems. Wow. I see so clearly now. If the world only had conservatives and republicans we'd be free from scandal and political cover ups. Liberals are all bad. Dems are all bad. Conservatives are good. Republicans are good."
    Which even a lazy and cursory look at my posting history would prove was laughable inaccurate. It also ignores that a lack of comment on a specific topic, does not equate to support. Hence, Strawman.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    My Pres vote history is Perot Clinton Bush Badnarik Obama. This year if Gary Johnson is not on the ballot I'm writing him in.

    I am against gun laws, I'd like a flat tax, I believe in smart and lean govt. I was against the patriot act. Against creating the DHS. I am for enforcing immigration law but also for a practical way to do it. I do believe in a universal healthcare standard. I'd probably agree to end almost every subsidy you could throw at me.

    I don't know what else. I guess if you asked me straight forward I'd answer honestly. That's all I can really do.

    I vote mostly R or I on local elections. I did vote for Cuomo though.

    My purpose wasn't to defend liberals. Although you won't believe me. I find you to be a poster with more integrity that most. You normally don't walk down a party line. However when you say something like the post I criticized I find it to be intellectually dishonest. You know that every sample you decided was typical liberal was really typical (fill n party here) stuff.
    I don't intend to get into a long quote-by-quote discussion (as you and I so often do , not a bad thing tbh).

    All I'll say is that reading over yoour post, I'm not seeing "Conservative" here, I'm seeing "Liberal Independant" in terms of policies and positions.

    If your intent was not to defend liberals, it certainly came accross that way.

    And I do not agree that the specific quotes I listed were "all politicians". Thats too simple. (D) and (R) certainly both dodge hard questions, and avoid saying many things, but they do so in very different (albeit same of purpose) ways. The quotes listed above are all specific liberal-based dodges.

    As I said, conservatives have a whole different set of dodges, on (generally) a whole different set of avoidance-desired questions.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    I was outraged. When the bush administration did it. Now I'm a bit numb. Obama is Bush. I can admit that freely. We have had 12 years o the same President. Probably on our way to 4 more.

    Of course you have reasons to excuse Bush and have outrage for Obama. R trumps D. I get that.


    I'm not voting for Obama. I just don't get outraged anymore. Because yes, they all do it.
    I didn't realize the Bush administration leaked national security secrets. Please share. And Valerie Plame was not a national security secret leaked for political gain so using that example is worthless. Obama's people leaked the existence of a plant in the AQ in Yemen terror group. They leaked the operational details of the Bin Ladin raid including the doctor that helped identify him. They leaked the joint program with the Israelis to cyber attack the Iranian centrifuges using the Flame and Stuxnet viruses. Not to mention Barrys kill list. To equate that to outing a desk jockey CIA agent whose husband had been spreading lies that needed correcting is disingenuous.

    Our allies are afraid to share intel with us now because they know that secrets aren't safe here.

  18. #18
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,232
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    He isn't outraged about an administration that leaks national security secrets for political points. No biggie, everyone does it. I don't personally recall it ever happening before but who knows.

    He isn't outraged about a cover up of a terror attack for political purposes. We know through sworn testimony before congress that the State Department and the Oval Office were well aware of what happened there. They watched it go down in real time for goodness sake. The attack took hours. There was no fast response team sent to rescue the folks in the compound. Requests for assistance appear to have been denied. Why?

    No outrage for that, everyone does it right? Well no actually we have never really seen anything like this.

    Well, I mean, it's "not optimal"....

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    I didn't realize the Bush administration leaked national security secrets. Please share. And Valerie Plame was not a national security secret leaked for political gain so using that example is worthless. Obama's people leaked the existence of a plant in the AQ in Yemen terror group. They leaked the operational details of the Bin Ladin raid including the doctor that helped identify him. They leaked the joint program with the Israelis to cyber attack the Iranian centrifuges using the Flame and Stuxnet viruses. Not to mention Barrys kill list. To equate that to outing a desk jockey CIA agent whose husband had been spreading lies that needed correcting is disingenuous.

    Our allies are afraid to share intel with us now because they know that secrets aren't safe here.
    it's good to know we agree on all the other points.

    So leaks is all we have to discuss....Plaime is off limits..

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...stration_leaks




    how about the Al Jazeera bombing, or the Rumsfeld Memo, national Planning Scenarios,


    there are a few......although you will figure out how to excuse all of them...."Liberal lies! Liberal Lies!"

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by piney View Post
    it's good to know we agree on all the other points.

    So leaks is all we have to discuss....Plaime is off limits..

    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php...stration_leaks




    how about the Al Jazeera bombing, or the Rumsfeld Memo, national Planning Scenarios,


    there are a few......although you will figure out how to excuse all of them...."Liberal lies! Liberal Lies!"
    Well considering you listed the "Al Jazeera Bombing" story as one of your examples, and that was supposedly leaked by a British agent.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us