CosmicBills Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 (edited) Its true. But he has advanced degrees in door management and geriatrics. Only because I needed a fallback in case my career in the adult film industry doesn't pan out. Okay. I didn't answer the question because, as I already wrote, its far from the point of the article. But if it's "far from the point of the article", why then did you choose to select those specific lines of text to include in your snippet? Was it because you knew those lines to be red meat to people like me and those who oppose it? (If so, props.) That is the thing that is so maddening to me about the vast majority of your posts. You claim to be just passing on articles you find relevant and/or illuminating without having any horse in the race, but the lines of text you choose to highlight and include in your post here are usually the most divisive and combative talking points of the far right. And when you are asked about your choice, you either deflect or ignore which, to someone who likes to fill in the gaps, can be taken as a sign of intellectual insincerity. One day I'll figure you out. One day. The answer is that Gay Rights is a human cause,........................... as is pro-life beliefs and religious liberty is. The fact that I highlighted it does not detract (other than in your head) anyway from the point about the media being blind to its biases So, go off on your tangents, and continue to amuse veryone here. Fair... but this is still a dodge. You chose to highlight it in the context of being a liberal plank and proof that Bezos is indeed a liberal, in light of your previous posts and the article itself, it smacks of spite. If I'm wrong, I apologize. I'm wrong quite often and am never afraid to admit it. PS. there is, of course, no reason that you (or anyone) should be aware of any pattern in my postings, but the fact is I do not do the "back and forth" and "answer this question" silliness that many here enjoy, and that certainly has nothing to do with you. (sorry to spoil your illusions) I never assumed it had anything to do with me. Edited August 14, 2013 by tgreg99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 divisive and combative talking points of the far right. I wonder...do most not-liberals, like tgreg, understand the difference between a talking point, and a fact? B-Man's articles are news reports, largely. Or, they come from Charles, The Liberal Cleaver. (Charles the Liberal Foe Hammer?) Nobody can say Charles Krauthammer presents fact-less positions, or spin. I haven't seen a single liberal with the balls to question his premises in years, and I read liberal columns every week if not day. What is so egregious about posting the news, or a piece of cogent analysis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I wonder...do most not-liberals, like tgreg, understand the difference between a talking point, and a fact? B-Man's articles are news reports, largely. Or, they come from Charles, The Liberal Cleaver. (Charles the Liberal Foe Hammer?) Nobody can say Charles Krauthammer presents fact-less positions, or spin. I haven't seen a single liberal with the balls to question his premises in years, and I read liberal columns every week if not day. What is so egregious about posting the news, or a piece of cogent analysis? Again, it helps if you read the entire post, or at least quote me accurately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 (edited) Again, it helps if you read the entire post, or at least quote me accurately. I did, and I am taking issue with the above part of it. Now, have you read this sentence properly? Do you comprehend it? Good. Now tell me how posting a news article is "the same" as posting whatever is on the front page of Media Matters? Edited August 14, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 I did, and I am taking issue with the above part of it. Now, have you read this sentene properly? Do you comprehend it? Good. Now tell me how posting a news article is "the same" as posting whatever is on the front page of Media Matters? You did not quote me accurately or even understand what I wrote. If you had, you would realize your mistake and understand why your question is as pointless as it is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 (edited) You did not quote me accurately or even understand what I wrote. If you had, you would realize your mistake and understand why your question is as pointless as it is stupid. Jesus. Look here: I not only quoted you accurately, and understood what you wrote, I asked you, within the context of what you wrote, why you think B-Man, who lagely posts news articles, and analysis from well respected writers(largely...he sneeks in the occasional wingnutty guy...but that was early on, when he first got here. He doesn't do it much any more.) is posting "talking points". What he posts is not "talking points". It's fact, or cogent analysis based on facts. So, then I asked: can you tell the difference? Edited August 14, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Jesus. Look here: I not only quoted you accurately, and understood what you wrote... Actually, you did not quote me accurately. You quoted me as saying this: divisive and combative talking points of the far right. When I really said this: You claim to be just passing on articles you find relevant and/or illuminating without having any horse in the race, but the lines of text you choose to highlight and include in your post here are usually the most divisive and combative talking points of the far right. Had you quoted me accurately or understood the simple point I was making, you'd realize that this question: ... I asked you, within the context of what you wrote (the context which we have now demonstrated you clearly did not comprehend ... but go on), why you think B-Man, who lagely posts news articles, and analysis from well respected writers(largely...he sneeks in the occasional wingnutty guy...but that was early on, when he first got here. He doesn't do it much any more.) is posting "talking points". What he posts is not "talking points". It's fact, or cogent analysis based on facts. So, then I asked: can you tell the difference? ... was in fact stupid and irrelevant to the discussion on hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 No, you still don't get that I do understand. The trouble here is: the things that are highlighted are either factual, the result of analysis, or...funny. They are not talking points...still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 14, 2013 Share Posted August 14, 2013 Look here: I not only quoted you accurately, and understood what you wrote, I asked you, within the context of what you wrote, why you think B-Man, who lagely posts news articles, and analysis from well respected writers(largely...he sneeks in the occasional wingnutty guy...but that was early on, when he first got here. He doesn't do it much any more.) is posting "talking points". What he posts is not "talking points". It's fact, or cogent analysis based on facts. So, then I asked: can you tell the difference? Unfortunately, many simply dismiss conservative authors without even the attempt of reading a different viewpoint, but I'll keep trying. P.S. I am off to find the most "wingnutty" article I can to post , just to be ornery .................................lol . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts