First of all, you have on previous occasions claimed that the lie came from President Lawnchair himself, now you are pinning it on someone else.
Can you expound upon your theory of lying? You seem to imply that #OccupyResoluteDesk is firewalled by sending a flunky out to spew the talking points.
When you accuse someone of lying, you are saying that they specifically said something they knew to not be true. It's no more complicated than that. In order to prove that someone was lying you need to show that they knew that thing to not be true.
If you say that person B is a mouthpiece for person A, and A sent out B to say something untrue knowing it to be untrue, you still need to show that A knew the statement to be untrue if you are aiming to show that A was lying by proxy through B. I was simply checking to see if you were trying to change your statement from your earlier allegation of President Lawnchair himself lying (which was your accusation many time in the past) to someone else lying on his behalf (which I had not seen you say this way before).
Well, you haven't made a legitimate policy claim against the president so far that is in any way different from a policy perspective than what any republican president has ever done.
So you're saying that because child abuse has plenty of historical instances, someone like a Jerry Sandusky should be acquitted?
Even as far off the deep end as you have been willingly diving that is a strange jump for you. If I may clarify I was specifically mentioning domestic policies of the federal government under the duration of the term of President Lawnchair; I stand by my earlier statement that in that lens there is not a single thing he has done that would have not been done by a republican president before him. We could go further from there to also state that he hasn't done anything novel in foreign policy either; his foreign policy being so uninspired that no republican would have wavered from it, either.
If principles matter, they should be applied evenly. I'd rather political careers be snuffed than Ambassadors.
If you believe that President Lawnchair could have somehow prevented those four deaths on Sept 11 of last year, please explain how. I have been asking you to describe that for ... this entire thread.
Now, I have to take the mockery for being insufficiently critical of Bush and the GOP. That's fair
That barely even scratches the surface. You are treating President Lawnchair as if he is doing something radically different from his conservative predecessors when the opposite is the truth.
But the utter bogosity of your unwillingness to admit that BHO is a mediocre placeholder of a chap
This suggests that indeed you are not reading my posts in their entirety. You should know at least a couple things about me by now:
- I don't like conservative presidents or conservative politics in this country and see them as sending our country in the wrong direction
- I have consistently argued that President Lawnchair will have a historical record as the most conservative president we've ever had prior to 2008
Knowing those two things about me, you should not be able to even conclude that I would consider him to be as good as mediocre from a policy standpoint.
with a head full of wretched ideas
If his actions reflect his ideas, then he went into the presidency with a head full of very conservative ideas. I would prefer to think that his actions oppose his ideas and reflect instead his desire to stay in office and not be sent home with a record of having not signed any legislation into law at all.
And that's why I refer to the no-talent rodeo clown [...] he's just a placeholder
That statement is counter to what you wrote earlier. You earlier tried to place a claim that he is doing terrible and dangerous things to our country, and now you are trying to claim that he is doing nothing at all. The two claims are, at the very least, completely incompatible.
But keep on defending the indefensible, by all means.
This statement supports my hypothesis that you do not read much of my comments any more. I am not defending anything. I am merely asking how you come up with your allegations. I ask you, and you do not reply. If I said that I felt the Koch Brothers should be drawn and quartered tomorrow at sun-up you would certainly want to know why. If my response was on the order of your response when I ask you for the rationale for your requests for President Lawnchair to be removed from office and executed sans trial you would be similarly dissatisfied.