Oh believe me, there are plenty of idiots here. They are actually fun because their arguments are easy to shoot down.
Like when they say most rich people inherited their fortunes. That’s another fun one that often goes unchallenged on the ignorance fighting board.
This is interesting as an insight into your character, but has nothing to do with life on planet Earth. Nobody reads my posts and thinks they represent Cecil, but this does suggest you think I’m desperate to bolster my own reputation. Nope- that’s your thing.
You don’t actually respond to what people say. You may quote them, but you aren’t taking it in.
You say you understand how wrong you have been, but you have never learned anything on this board. You talk and talk and talk and talk. You go into threads where there is an actual conversation, and you destroy it, because there is no give and take with you. Because you appear to be incapable of learning and self-assessment.
The “conversation” anyone can have with you is like talking to a Magic 8 Ball. The answers vary a tiny bit, but there is a limited set of answers and they aren’t actually triggered by anything the other person said. They’re just these random outpourings of stuff.
Yes. We know.
Admittedly I’m not a mindreader, but I can’t help but notice that many posters here have an inflated view of the quality of this board because it “fights ignorance”. While that may have once been true and still is for General Questions and Comment on Cecil’s Columns, the political threads have long since degenerated into something more typical of your average discussion board. There is no higher standard there. It’s time to admit that if you aren’t here because you think Straight Dope is superior to the average discussion board, that you’re here because you like the echo chamber.
Are you on other discussion boards, and if not, why not?
adaher, do you recognize that you’re wrong about Lizza, who’s not a partisan journalist? Do you recognize that you were wrong when you claimed that no liberals on this board have criticized the ACA?
For our amusement, can you cite an argument that you think you’ve shot down?
Then it’s obvious you don’t read what I post. I’m about as far away from the typical talking points as you can get, and I engage people in a civil and intellectual manner, even if you believe it’s a faux type of intellectualism.
In fact, I think that’s the real issue here. Conspiracy theorists and people who just shout partisan hyperbole exist on this board as with any other. But since they don’t really challenge your cherished views in any meaningful way, they aren’t to worthy of notice aside from an odd humorous comment. The first time I saw real anger on this board was when I posted some cites demonstrating the faults of single-payer health care. And sure, in that thread I also made unsupported claims or got my facts mixed up. But naturally people wanted to focus on that, anything to avoid grappling with the legitimate inferiority of single payer.
I make no claims about this being better than other boards. The statement is basically meaningless anyway. Again, you’re projecting.
Weren’t you the one who claimed Republicans obstruct everything? Is that statement not in the same class as me saying liberals don’t criticize ACA?
As for Lizza, I guess our mileage varies. While ostensibly non-partisan, I’ve noticed that he’s very friendly to Democrats(kinda like a Candy Crowley), which could be why memos were released to him. A Fox journalist would have been much more skeptical. Heck, the Washington Post would have been much more skeptical.
Good. Then I’m glad to be wrong in this case. However, if this board is not better than other boards, in your view, then why get upset about it having denizens like myself who are typical of any board you should choose to post on?
My issue with you is that you’re arrogant, slimy, and constantly wrong. Everything else you are trying to bring to the discussion is irrelevant. It’s also typical in that once again, your response is “but other people do it!”
otio! Dnftt!
OMG, he’s trolling? Let’s all go down to the quarry and beat a joke to death.
I made the statement that the Republican leadership planned to oppose every major proposal Obama made- essentially, to put as the top priority opposing President Obama. McConnell and others are on record with similar statements.
No, because my statement is accurate, and yours was wildly false. I recognize that “major proposal” can be interpreted in different ways in my statement- yes, some Republicans have voted for stuff that Obama signed, but they are on record (and the voting record shows this) as putting “prevent Obama from getting credit for legislation” ahead of “getting legislation done”.
Cite- I think you’ve pulled this out of your ass. Lizza’s a good journalist, and I think you don’t know shit about him. Prove me wrong.
And let me apologize for doing what I complained about: jumping the gun and assuming I’d beaten you. Our discussion there is actually pretty interesting and far from settled.
The statements are similar. Partially correct, and wrong because they are meant to be absolute when the reality is not so black and white. I was wrong that liberals had not critcized ACA, but the only critiques I’d seen were those from the left. Despite huge problems with the rollout that are even causing Robert Gibbs to get annoyed, as well as non-partisan news sources now digging into why there were screwups, it appears that the first notice of all this is the cite I posted in this thread. Marley says it’s a worthy topic of discussion, yet none of the people Marley approves of are ever likely to post anything about that subject. Instead, the response to the IT failures has been that this is just what always happens. Oh, and we should have single payer instead.
That would be like proving that Brit Hume is partisan and not a good journalist. Further I never said he wasn’t a good journalist. Lots of the best journalists are partisans. One can be partisan and fair. But the downside to partisanship is that you will often accept something your told because you’d like to believe it’s true. Dan Rather fell into that trap.
Oh, and Marley, I’m sorry if I’ve developed some contempt for many of the people here. You should know my view by now about how things should work when talking about politics. Being wrong is a far lesser sin than being an asshole.
And on that I’m on VERY firm ground, since being wrong won’t get you banned, but being an asshole will.
I realize many of you wish it was the other way around, but again, you can start such a forum if you like.
Are you under the impression you either have to be wrong or an asshole? You could try being neither. It might be a fascinating new experience. Try to be factually accurate a nonzero percentage of the time and when you do get called out for making mistakes, acknowledge it instead of repeating the errors and changing the subject.
My statement was accurate. Yours was not. Claiming that no liberals have criticized the ACA is laughably false, and it’s ridiculous to qualify that by complaining that the criticism was “from the left”. Of course it was from the left- you were talking about liberals!
The criticism of the posts about the IT stuff is because it just seems like partisan hackery. Yes, the computer systems should have been better prepared. But so what? That’s a minor mistake- many people might have to wait a few days or take some extra time to sign up for something that won’t go into effect for a few months. It should be fixed, and it should have been ready in time- and it’s worth discussing. But it’s weak partisan hackery to attack this as if it’s a major weakness of the ACA, and blaming it on Obama is just stupid.
You implied that his report was less reliable because he was partisan. He’s not partisan, and his report was actually sourced a lot better than your link was.
This is a recurring problem for you- making wrong and ignorant claims like that and moving on as if you had good reason to make them when called on it. No, you didn’t have a good reason- it was stupid, you shouldn’t have made that claim, and the proper response is “I was wrong about Lizza”.
But all that being said, don’t think your criticism doesn’t bite. I do want to do better, because while I don’t consider being wrong a grave sin, it is embarrassing when you screw up. I had a really funny one on another board just today. Someone posted “Four ways to prove that Obama reduced the deficit.” I responded, “Four ways to mislead”, and then listed only two points, at which the next poster commented on my lack of ability to count. Doh!
Of course, if that happened here, it wouldn’t just derail the whole thread(which BTW, is more often the way people respond to me than what I actually post), but it would be a nice way to change the subject. Instead of talking about the legitimate points I raised, Dopers would seize on what I got wrong(2 is not 4). The mark of a good discussion board is one where someone saying something dumb doesn’t derail the thread because everyone piles on.
A blog! Yes, of course, addy, that’s it! A blog, where people can simply go there and drink deeply of your wisdom and knowledge! Of course, you may have to buy a server to handle the avalanche of eager acolytes. We could have a bake sale!