Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 731

Schneiderman’s resigned. As opposed to announcing a Senate bid, which I guess would have been the other realistic possibility these days.

CatBus, he may well do so!

Frink, I think it’s more notable how lousy NY politicians are, rather than citing some unrelated example of hypocrisy.

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

Frink, I think it’s more notable how lousy NY politicians are, rather than citing some unrelated example of hypocrisy.

You have your perspective and I have mine, but thanks for the unnecessary explanation on yours.

Less about perspective than nonsequiturs. Like if you commented on hypocritical evangelicalism and I said, kinda like liberal politicians who assault women. What would be the point? To suggest such hypocrisy isn’t remarkable? To distract from the topic at hand? I’d enjoy your own unnecessary explanation.

Obama was never a liberal. He’s center-right. That’s why he endorsed Feinstein.

*extremely leftist voice*

Actually, being center-right is exactly what it is to be a liberal.

He’s moderately socially liberal, but in terms of everything else, he isn’t at all. He deported more people than Bush, he wiretapped more people than Bush, he preserved the Bush tax cuts, he’s as corporate as can be, and he was as horrible to whistleblowers as anyone else.

Evangelical moralizers that do what they condemn are more hypocritical than liberal politicians that do what they condemn.

Exactly.

TV’s Frink said:

It’s hard to get more hypocritical than a religious person going against the theoretical word of God.

Sure glad we aren’t talking about those bad Democrats anymore!

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

It’s hard to get more hypocritical than a religious person going against the theoretical word of God.

Sure glad we aren’t talking about those bad Democrats anymore!

I talked bad about Obama a few posts ago.

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

It’s hard to get more hypocritical than a religious person going against the theoretical word of God.

Sure glad we aren’t talking about those bad Democrats anymore!

I talked bad about Obama a few posts ago.

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT OR SOMETHING?!?!

Just like evangelicals!

Mrebo, I genuinely never have any idea what you’re trying to get at.

I feel like all of your posts are mind games trying to lead the person you’re talking to into saying something so that you can make some kind of point, but I never get it.

If you take my posts at face value rather than skittering around like I’m going to trap you somehow, confusion will disappear.

Would it somehow seem less tricky if I phrased my post to Frink as, “what does that have to do with anything?” Or is that kind of response tricky?

Sometimes I may be seeking to make a point and maybe get someone to see a different perspective (oh, the horror). But I think my posts are straightforward. Often Frink seems to think I’m saying something I’m not and his disbelief is weird.

Here it was really just a reaction to Frink pulling out the, “but what about these guys I don’t like,” card.

Mrebo said:

If you take my posts at face value rather than skittering around like I’m going to trap you somehow, confusion will disappear.

That actually makes it more confusing. I took your posts at face value and that’s how I came to the conclusion that you’re fishing for a specific response with most of them.

Would it somehow seem less tricky if I phrased my post to Frink as, “what does that have to do with anything?” Or is that kind of response tricky?

That would’ve made a lot more sense, actually. It would feel like less of a “gotchya.”

Sometimes I may be seeking to make a point and maybe get someone to see a different perspective (oh, the horror). But I think my posts are straightforward. Often Frink seems to think I’m saying something I’m not and his disbelief is weird.

It isn’t that you’re trying to get people to see a different perspective, it’s that you (seem to be) trying to get people to say something or allude to something so that you can then point out their contradictions or their hypocrisy. I don’t know what you’re up to, but it seems like it’s something like that.

Here it was really just a reaction to Frink pulling out the, “but what about these guys I don’t like,” card.

I don’t think it was a card. I’d hate to presume to speak for someone else, but I doubt that Frink feels so strongly about the New York AG that he felt the need to redirect the attention toward someone else.

I don’t even think he’s been convicted yet.