Why are you still talking about CNN? The topic under discussion is YOUR misrepresentation of the quote. (I can use large fonts too)
Because my presentation of the quote mimics CNN’s presentation here.
Headlines are conventional for news sites. The same format would be followed regardless of the story. There wasn’t an attempt to obscure like you do.
So, if I’m understanding correctly, you are admitting that you misrepresented the quote, but think your misrepresentation is OK because of something CNN did?
“They did a bad thing, why can’t I do a bad thing?”
Rather than not doing the bad thing.
Or, alternatively: They did a thing. I did it too. Neither one of us thinks it’s a “bad thing”.
No, you’re not understanding correctly. I don’t think that either CNN or I misrepresented Cuomo’s quote.
Yeah, you did. Your original post eliminated the context of the quote.
We disagree on this point. I don’t see that changing anytime soon. Must we keep beating this dead horse?
There’s your OP. Show me the context.
Well, if you admitted that you misrepresented the quote we could probably stop with the beatings.
I don’t believe I did. I don’t believe CNN did either. Why would I admit to doing something that I don’t believe I did?
This is all fascinating, really. Compelling stuff. I hope this thread never ends.
we eliminated it in the same epoch as many other countries did. TONS of other countries eliminated it decades later. In many cases, in many decades later. And we didn’t have a king to do it by fiat as elsewhere.
too bad Europe did all their slave trading outside of their host countries, so they didn’t have to deal with the aftereffects at home; their colonies just suffered a lot worse economically and politically than the blacks did here. Also, how did other large countries treat ethnic/racial minorities?
Yes; the left is oikophobic (doesn’t like what they have), they think the grass is greener everywhere else, even when one side has a ton of grass which due to its size is hard to keep looking nice while the other has a very pretty small little plot. They’re fed stuff from leftist profs who admired communism, and the sentiment of bringing down those who have it easy not to help anyone but for revenge is the idea.
We’ll be happy to explain to you in so many words, as evil economist did, why your thinking about what you did is completely mistaken. You were wrong. Your equivalence with what CNN did is false, because they were totally different contextual situations. We’ll keep beating this horse as long as you deny reality. I’m prepared to keep this up forever if you want to go down that path.
Please note that this behavior is absolutely identical to that of moon hoaxers. Thank you for the continual confirmation.
You seem to have conveniently ignored my rebuttal of your post in #164. How 'bout just a response to the very last line? Too much for you to manage?
Conveniently, I just happened to be reading a letters to the editor column. The writer accused the New York Times and the Washington Post and [insert many other names here] and his local editorial writer, all independent newspapers, with independent writers and policies, of blindly writing the same anti-Trump screeds instead of reporting the truth. Somehow it didn’t occur to him that the simpler conclusion would be that they are all observing and reporting the same objectivity reality that he, for whatever reasons, denies.
Coincidentally, we have a thread in which everybody has a chance to read and report on the same objectivity reality, and in which everybody comes down on one version of that truth.
Except you.
As long as you deny reality, I’ll be happy to remind you of it, just like so many other independent posters.
But apparently not happy to respond to questions or admit your errors?
One side has been making errors all along and has loudly denied ever doing so. I’m on the other side.
The issue is why you ripped a quote out of context and used it to attack a whole political consciousness. You cannot deny that’s what you were doing. There was no need to start a thread with such a poisoned OP unless that was your intent. Again, everybody here independently read it that way, despite your desperate quibbles about language meant to deflect the opprobrium away from you.
You’re wrong. You’ve been wrong in all your posts. You continue to deny it. We continue to insist about objective reality. It’s very soothing to have reality to fall back on.
No, you’re not and I’ve already shown where and why.