(01-17-2022 04:03 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-17-2022 03:41 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(01-17-2022 03:39 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-17-2022 10:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-17-2022 10:02 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I think the points are pretty good. What do you think about Biden's rather vague hand wavey language? You seem to to chalk it up as the end all and be all for the subject.

I mean, Biden went out of his way to label Rittenhouse a white supremacist, and here, he can only make vague statements about terror and only obliquely imply about the issue of 'domestic terror'. Quick on the trigger to blame domestic terror (falsely), and here simply waxes stupidly about a general 'act of terror' and tries to shoehorn a thing about domestic terror into the conversation.

But I guess Happy Meal's hand waving and avoiding the real issue and subtly denoting 'domestic terrorism' is pretty solid for you?

Are you comfortable with that? Do you see the hand waving occurring? Do you care?

Biden made a mistake in speaking about Rhittenhouse well before he had the facts and stepped in it.

I guess you like that approach as it seems, in this instance, you would have preferred he label it an act of terror (or terrorism or whatever) off the bat?

Or would you prefer he wait, like he should have done with Rhittenhouse?

In terms of Rittenhouse, Biden made the comment even after it was apparent that Rittenhouse was not a white supremacist.

In this case, it seems absolutely and readily apparent even after 2 hours of the end of the issue that this was an act of Islamic/anti Semitic terrorism.

The immediate above was seemingly apparent even in the course of it due to the demands.

What I would prefer, is that Biden actually elucidate a proper version of a situation --- instead, he seemingly creates a 'white supremacist' angle when there is none, and in the second case, downplays the very apparent Islamic/anti-Semitic angle all the while delivering a portion that tends to implicate 'domestic' terrorism.

In both cases, Biden has shaded the truth to fit the progressive narrative. Kind of mean, venal, and disgusting in my book. Perhaps not to others.

I didn't see his statement. How did Biden "create a white supremacist" angle from his statement on this event?

See bolded. It appears the "white supremacist" accusation applies only to Rhittenhouse.

And interestingly enough, there is *such* a massive difference between denoting 'white supremacist and militia member' in one case, and the now current statement of 'against the rise of extremism in this country.'

In short, Biden tried his previous comments in a watered down form -- and even then they were erroneous.

In each of these instances Biden attempts to deflect causation to an opponent de jure in an incorrect manner.