You know its bad when Dems ban audio/video from debates

[sirs]

"I have argued ideas...this one is the continued non-existent criticism of a Democrat by those on the left, that  would be excoriated by everyone, including those on the right, had this been a Republican"

And there is no requirement for anyone to criticize this action

*sigh*.....since you continue to insist I've claimed something that I never have, even having repeatedly demonstrated the opposite, I think we can close this chapter now

It's unfortunate now that pointing out something of note, has now been redefined as mandating answers/responses/criticisms



I'm sure our patrons will also note how the post you repeated of mine, debunks, that last vestage of incorrect concluding, that of sirs giving a pass to a Republican if he pulled the same dren.  For that, I thank you

[BT]

It's unfortunate now that pointing out something of note, has now been redefined as mandating answers/responses/criticisms

You are the one who felt the need to point out the lack of comment from certain quarters.

Or do you now deny that too?

[sirs]

Pointing out is NOT the same as demanding

Then again, this was already addressed page 1

[BT]

Pointing out is NOT the same as demanding

Then what was your point

in pointing it out.

[sirs]

Asked and answered multiple times already, Bt.  You wish a repeat?....ok.....
- "Since when is a requirement of control necessary to condem/criticize <enter anything here>"
- "No mandate, no demand, no requirement of any kind.  Merely an astute observation."
- "Merely criticising it, and observing how the left largely ignores it, or with your example, even defend it"
- "It's unfortunate now that pointing out something of note, has now been redefined as mandating answers/responses/criticisms"

My point, was POINTING IT OUT
 

[BT]

My point, was POINTING IT OUT

To what end?

Why was the lack of response from XO noteworthy? Why would it speak volumes, if as you have already stipulated, there is no requirement to respond?

[sirs]

Merely hi lighting (i.e. pointing out) the duplicity of current events & lack of outrage compared to if this were a Republican candidate

Then again this too has been asked and answered........multiple times

[BT]

Couple problems with that.

One it presupposes a given response absent all pertinent facts.

It shows stereotypical thought on your behalf, and a firm lack of belief that individuals are capable of forming their own opinions even if it goes against the grain of a supposed party line.

There really isn't anything to criticize once the facts are known.

[sirs]

No, the problem is your assumption of presupposing, in this case, that sirs was demanding a response.  It's ironically consistent with your problem of prejudging, and incorrectly pre-labeling me, based on that wrong judgement

It'd be a stereotypical thought if someone from the far left choose to respond, and debunked my deductions.  It never came, thus helping to validate it instead.

The problem is then manifested to a much higher level when your presumptions are all shown to be in error, but you insist on continuing to apply them

And that's what's really unfortunate, since the former can simply be an error in judgement.  The latter apparently requires a sense of ego, that must be maintained......despite repeatedly how in error you've been demonstrated to have been in

[BT]

No, the problem is your assumption of presupposing, in this case, that sirs was demanding a response.  It's ironically consistent with your problem of prejudging, and incorrectly pre-labeling me, based on that wrong judgement

Right. That is why you often suffix the lack of response from the likes of XO and Tee that this lack of  non required response  speaks volumes.

It'd be a stereotypical thought if someone from the far left choose to respond, and debunked my deductions.  It never came, thus helping to validate it instead.

No i believe your demand was that they criticize the actions of the Democrat.Mere comment on the issue did not suffice.

The problem is then manifested to a much higher level when your presumptions are all shown to be in error, but you insist on continuing to apply them.

Such as ?

And that's what's really unfortunate, since the former can simply be an error in judgement.  The latter apparently requires a sense of ego, that must be maintained......despite repeatedly how in error you've been demonstrated to have been in

Right. Hit enter declare victory.

[sirs]

Bt, your claiming I was mandating others to respond has consistently been shown in error.  Your claim that I was simply a GOP supporter bashing a Democrat, who I'd give a republican a pass for the same infraction, was shown to be in error.  Your claiming I was dissing charitable events was shown to be in error

HARDLY a "declare victory, hit enter" phenomenon.  But nice try

[BT]

Nonsense. You constantly post that a lack of a specific response from the likes of XO and Tee speaks volumes.

What the hell does it say?

[sirs]

asked and answered already.  It says it speaks volumes     

Since this has devolved into you asking the same questions, and making the same misrepresentations, at this point, I think its safe to assume we can <hit enter & declare victory>, since any subsequent questions and proclamations will have undoubtedly have already been answered and debunked many a time earlier, in this thread.

[BT]

It says it speaks volumes

And what does that mean?