(12-05-2018 06:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  More whattabout defenses too. The hallmark of 2nd grade classrooms the nation over. Be better. I refuse to engage in these battles because they are THEE lowest form of discussion. Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now!!

It’s a circular argument and a blatant deflection.

Alternatively it’s a case of special pleading - where THIS TIME, it’s important but wasn’t in the past.

It's the lies....

(12-06-2018 02:47 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's the lies....

Which we've seen from all politicians everywhere since the dawn of time... Obama was a big time liar himself and that has been already covered. So it actually boils down to Trump being a case where you want to engage in special pleading. You clearly don't care about what happened to Kashoggi. You probably have concluded that we have to stay the course with Saudi Arabia being a strong U.S. ally. You probably have concluded that the crown prince is going anywhere.

Given that all that, this thread is really about nothing. It's verbal masturbation.

Here is the problem... If you didn't complain about it in the past, you set the precedent

We can argue a bit about degrees, but in most of these cases, the left loses

They equate the SOS using a private server and absolutely secret material and 30,000 missing documents to an Advisor using a private email account but no server, and no (yet) secret material and no missing documents. Hillary got 'nothing', so you can't possibly convict anyone else unless what they did is WORSE. Bills actual 'grabbing' of women and Hillary's defense of him and accusations of the women vs Donald's talking about grabbing them.

It's like the idea that someone who is pro life can't be pro death penalty based on some legitimate differences... or someone who argues that the drinking age should be 18 instead of 21 can't then (after his case loses) stand on the law and prosecute a 19 year old for underage drinking.

(12-06-2018 03:14 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Here is the problem... If you didn't complain about it in the past, you set the precedent

We can argue a bit about degrees, but in most of these cases, the left loses

They equate the SOS using a private server and absolutely secret material and 30,000 missing documents to an Advisor using a private email account but no server, and no (yet) secret material and no missing documents. Hillary got 'nothing', so you can't possibly convict anyone else unless what they did is WORSE. Bills actual 'grabbing' of women and Hillary's defense of him and accusations of the women vs Donald's talking about grabbing them.

It's like the idea that someone who is pro life can't be pro death penalty based on some legitimate differences... or someone who argues that the drinking age should be 18 instead of 21 can't then (after his case loses) stand on the law and prosecute a 19 year old for underage drinking.

Agree.

(12-05-2018 06:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  More whattabout defenses too. The hallmark of 2nd grade classrooms the nation over. Be better. I refuse to engage in these battles because they are THE lowest form of discussion. Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now!!
It’s a circular argument and a blatant deflection.

Mach,

I have zero problem with your calling out anyone in the Trump administration or in the Republican Party or on the right--as long as you called out members of the Obama administration or democrats or on the left with equal vigor for similar or worse transactions.

"Whataboutism" is "Johnny got away with it, so I should too." That is not what is being said, although that seems to be your accusation. What is being said is not that one makes the other okay, but that both are wrong. And you are hypocritical for only calling out one.

You can't seem to wrap your head around, for example, the basic concept that using a private email is a lesser transgression than using a private email and a non-secure server to transmit and store classified information. Actually, the statute provides no criminal penalty for using a private server. Therefore it is unseemly at best for you to argue that someone who did the former should be locked up whereas someone who did the latter should go scot free. Someone who did the former should be punished less severely, if at all, than someone who did the latter. If you want Ivanka to do time, then you need to want Hillary to do more time. You haven't even sniffed that.

(12-05-2018 06:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  More whattabout defenses too. The hallmark of 2nd grade classrooms the nation over. Be better. I refuse to engage in these battles because they are THEE lowest form of discussion. Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now!!

It’s a circular argument and a blatant deflection.

Another fine example of the hypocrisy of the left...thank you

(12-07-2018 08:35 AM)450bench Wrote:  

(12-05-2018 06:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  More whattabout defenses too. The hallmark of 2nd grade classrooms the nation over. Be better. I refuse to engage in these battles because they are THEE lowest form of discussion. Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now!!

It’s a circular argument and a blatant deflection.

Another fine example of the hypocrisy of the left...thank you

It's really kind of sad. They try so hard to be holier-than-thou and they really do think they're making some kind of intellectually superior point.

Pitiful.

12/12 gents.

(12-05-2018 06:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  More whattabout defenses too. The hallmark of 2nd grade classrooms the nation over. Be better. I refuse to engage in these battles because they are THEE lowest form of discussion. Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now!!

No, you misstate the argument. It's not, "Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now?"

It's, "Billy and Barry did it too, and when they did it Mach told us 1) they didn't do it, 2) there was nothing wrong with it, and 3) it didn't matter anyway." Now a guy on the other team may have done it, and all of a sudden Mach is indignant.

The issue is not Billy or Barry or Donnie. It's you, Mach. Just apply the same standard to Donnie that you did to Billy and Barry, with equal vigor. You're not doing that.

(12-07-2018 04:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-05-2018 06:22 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  More whattabout defenses too. The hallmark of 2nd grade classrooms the nation over. Be better. I refuse to engage in these battles because they are THEE lowest form of discussion. Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now!!

No, you misstate the argument. It's not, "Billy and Barry did it also! Mommy can I have a piece of candy now?"

It's, "Billy and Barry did it too, and when they did it Mach told us 1) they didn't do it, 2) there was nothing wrong with it, and 3) it didn't matter anyway." Now a guy on the other team may have done it, and all of a sudden Mach is indignant.

The issue is not Billy or Barry or Donnie. It's Mach. Just apply the same standard to Donnie that you did to Billy and Barry, with equal vigor. You're not doing that.

Let me clarify this a bit for you Owl....

The point is that being a hypocrite while calling other people one is 'doubly' hypocritical.

Stumbled across this thread while searching for something different. Joe Biden is one of the most notoriously deceitful politician to ever walk the planet as a U.S. citizen...and he's our president today.