Why people need to lead by example
-
@raphjd said in Why people need to lead by example:
I never said anything about ALL liberals.
Then please delineate the specific, discrete, and distinct liberals that you were referring to. If you truly were not casting aspersions about all liberals, then you should easily tell me explicitly and in detail which specific liberals you were directing your comments.
If you can't do the above, then you were obviously making generalized statements about a category of peoples and the quoted language from you above is a pitiful defense.
Also, you posted a fake photograph.
-
-
@raphjd said in Why people need to lead by example:
A fake photo.
You lie.Your original post is a fake photograph that has been edited. Are you seriously denying it?
-
-
@hubrys said in Why people need to lead by example:
Then please delineate the specific, discrete, and distinct liberals that you were referring to. If you truly were not casting aspersions about all liberals, then you should easily tell me explicitly and in detail which specific liberals you were directing your comments.
If you can't do the above, then you were obviously making generalized statements about a category of peoples and the quoted language from you above is a pitiful defense.I'm still waiting, @raphjd
-
Keep waiting, because I owe you nothing.
-
It's an old, old tactic, something that I've seen referred to as "nutpicking." You find an example somewhere online, usually on Twitter or in some obscure forum post or comment, and then pretend that it applies to some vague and undefined set of "liberals" or whatever enemy of the day you're targeting.
In this case, you're targeting "white liberals" but, as noted above, you never do specify just which "white liberals" you are referring to. It certainly does not apply to anyone in this forum, nor does it apply to any Democratic politician nor to any liberal organization, pundit, leader, etc. And in this case, the example you found was not only fake, it was obviously fake.
The equivalent tactic from me would be to locate a comment on Breitbart or Gateway Pundit, or to find a blatantly racist thread on Parler, of which there are many, and pretend that it applies to some vague set of "conservatives" and that it somehow proves something.
It doesn't prove anything, of course, other than demonstrating a bankrupt argument and the poor logical and reasoning skills of the person making it.
-
I should add that this is always, without exception, an argument made in bad faith and it should never be taken seriously or treated as legitimate discourse. The premise on which such arguments are made is false. By engaging with the argument, you could be seen as implicitly accepting the premise.
Probably the best response is to ignore the argument completely since it is self-evidently false. Another good response, as we've seen here, is to challenge the premise. The person making the argument is left flailing, unable to respond (see above).
A similar tactic is often employed by right-wing media: the "people are saying" nonsense that they so often use. One of the many things I love about Jen Psaki is that she does not let them get away with this but responds by asking who, specifically, is saying such things. They either have no answer or they are forced to admit that "the people" they are referring to are Republican politicians and operatives (see Doocy, Steven for examples).
-
LOL, Jen Psaki? She's a liar if there ever was one.
The funny thing is, Hunter's laptop was a conspiracy theory and Russian disinformation, now suddenly the liberal media is finally admitting it's real.
It's the same with the Russian collusion BS. Democrats went on TV screeching that they had proof, but never once provided any, then in Shifty Schiff's secret hearing in the bunker, they said they never knew of any evidence of Russian collusion. I tried to get @bi4smooth to watch the Tucker video and read the links to the declassified testimony but he absolutely refused.
There have been many cases like this. You clowns call me a liar but refuse to even look at the links, even when they are official government links.
Of course, we all know that you guys refuse to look at the links because it would go against your narrative.
-
Q.E.D. I don't think anything more needs to be said.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login