HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » No, a "SMEAR" isn't the s...

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:18 AM

No, a "SMEAR" isn't the same thing as criticising someone's position.


A smear is a suggestion of meaning that has no basis in reality or a logically unwarranted inference.

Directly objecting to someone's actualy political positions or statements of their position isn't a smear.

Thanks, carry on.

24 replies, 2225 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 24 replies Author Time Post
Reply No, a "SMEAR" isn't the same thing as criticising someone's position. (Original post)
sibelian Mar 2016 OP
GreenPartyVoter Mar 2016 #1
sibelian Mar 2016 #2
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #5
baldguy Mar 2016 #3
NurseJackie Mar 2016 #12
Dem2 Mar 2016 #19
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #4
sibelian Mar 2016 #7
reddread Mar 2016 #8
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #10
reddread Mar 2016 #11
dsc Mar 2016 #13
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #14
dsc Mar 2016 #15
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #16
dsc Mar 2016 #17
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #18
dsc Mar 2016 #20
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #21
Betty Karlson Mar 2016 #9
sibelian Mar 2016 #24
Duckhunter935 Mar 2016 #6
Bluenorthwest Mar 2016 #22
sibelian Mar 2016 #23

Response to sibelian (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:18 AM

1. So glad someone gets it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenPartyVoter (Reply #1)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:20 AM

2. Oh, don't worry, EVERYBODY gets it


Apart from a handful of witless language manipulators that think everybody else is as gullible as they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #2)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:27 AM

5. Some people like to part like 1999 never ended. eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:23 AM

3. So, then it's appropriate to say that Hillary Clinton is getting smeared by Sanders supporters

 

When they trot out all the tired RW memes and talking points about her generated over the last 30 yrs to justify themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 08:33 AM

12. Exactly! You-got-it!

Pitiful, isn't it?


Go, Hillary!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #3)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:30 AM

19. Nope

You're a "witless language manipulator".

Now be quiet and take your lashings like a man.





(/s, sexism was sarcasm)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:26 AM

4. Projection is a thing... when calling criticism a vast right-wing conspiracy...

 

As evidenced on DU, every f*cking day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #4)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:31 AM

7. They have one trick and NO excuses. There are NO LONGER ANY EXCUSES


for voting for Clinton. The whole "she's going to win" thing was stupid to begin with.

They have nothing but silly games. There is no spine of meaning behind their behaviour. It's all just half-baked disruption and soggy debating tactics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:45 AM

8. and no issues

 

did she run on any issues in 2008?

oh wait. Same sex marriage?
hmmm.
any others?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reddread (Reply #8)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:51 AM

10. Her stance on same sex marriage was bigoted back then.

 

"marriage is a sacred bond between man and woman" - UGH!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #10)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:54 AM

11. thats a tough one to walk back

 

I dont think her personal view has changed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #10)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:06 AM

13. It was his position too

He opposed, as in the opposite of favoring, as in saying no to, marriage equality until after his state voted for it (via their elected representatives) in 2009. He called it too divisive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #13)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:11 AM

14. You mean Obama? Yes he was jumping back on the fence for very cynical reasons.

 

And I was angry with him for doing so - as I was angry with him for asking Rick Warren to pray at the inauguration right after Prop H8 passed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #14)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:21 AM

15. Obama and Sanders both

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #15)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:24 AM

16. Sanders never palled around with Rick Warren.

 

Instead, he is a strong team with Elizabeth Warren. Better company, better character, true ally of the GLBT community since the 1980-ies: Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #16)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:26 AM

17. that would be the elizabeth warren who voted for the GOP during the 1980's

or a different elizabeth warren. The simple, inconvenient truth is that Sanders did oppose marriage equality until after this state voted it in. He said it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #17)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:30 AM

18. Yes, that Warren - the one who could explain her change of heart

 

unlike Clinton, who seemed to "convert" only when polls said she absolutely had to. And even then, she still hasn't had ONE picture taken where she shares the frame with an ordinary same sex family. And then she praised Nancy Reagan for silent activism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #18)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:33 AM

20. when did she explain this change of heart

All I heard was that she stopped trusting their economic stewardship, not that she found any of their social issue positions, which they held then and hold now, problematic then or that she finds them problematic now enough that she would not vote for them if they changed their economic positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #20)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 09:37 AM

21. Feel free to correct yourself by watching her 2012 victory speech,

 

and meanwhile feast your eyes on Clinton's video where she explains her change of heart - oh no, there isn't one at all. Just a lot of videos where she says that "marriage is a sacred bond between man and woman".

Even that announcement video of hers: it includes a gay couple ("we plan to get married in 2016" and then Clinton: "Well IIIIIIIII have plans too"

In retrospect, we might as well paraphrase it as: "Enough about you people. Let's talk about MY turn."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #7)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:49 AM

9. In their defense, there are some massive primary losses on the horizon for Clinton.

 

What way to limit those but by purging the web of any and all enthousiasm for Sanders?

But if I may quote some poetry:

"Who can push back the waves of the sea?
The effort itself makes another wave."

Wie duwt de golven van de zee terug?
Het pogen zelf doet weer een golf ontstaan."

- J.H. Leopold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Betty Karlson (Reply #9)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:19 PM

24. Hm! Unlikely to be achieved through Internet message boards.


People don't form their opinions about politics from watching battles between supporters...

But you knew that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 06:31 AM

6. True

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Original post)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 11:20 AM

22. Our beloved rivals and their candidate Sec Clinton share a trait that is currently making them

 

jittery. They know some Bernie friendly States are coming up and they know that when not winning Hillary gets prone to verbal blunders and that they themselves do the same. They see a hard stretch coming, Hillary could at any minute do another 'Ron and Nancy were HIV activists' song and dance and any number of their own might say too much and be found out.

It's all right there just under the surface with her and with lots of her supporters. Too much Bernie victory and they will lose composure and spout the hot sauce smears that simmer like emotional magma in their frightened hearts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #22)

Tue Mar 22, 2016, 03:12 PM

23. This is the movement that wants to lead the United States.


It's troublesome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread