General Discussion

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)

97. This tactic always amuses me.

Fri Jun 14, 2013, 05:31 AM

Jun 2013

When someone uses an accurate word to describe what you are doing or advocating, just put the word in quotation marks, add some exclamation points, and try to neutralize it by pretending it's an epithet instead of an accurate descriptor.

Yes, "authoritarian" means something. So does "corporate." So does "hypocrisy." And, believe it or not, so does "Third Way." All of these words have accepted meanings, and the lame defensive tactic you just tried to employ here is shamelessly overused when they are accurately applied to the behavior of corporate Democrats. Defense of a government's spying on its own citizens is pretty damned well authoritarian.

I always picture an indignant poodle rearing up in outrage and exclaiming, "What?! You called me a "DOG"??????"

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

121 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Want proof that NSA snooping thwarts terror plots? Stand by, Senator Feinstein says [View all] Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 OP

I honestly don't care. It still wouldn't make it legal or moral. nt Live and Learn Jun 2013 #1

Legal? Well it's looks like it was legal Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 #4

It is unconstitutional which makes it illegal. nt Live and Learn Jun 2013 #7

How come the Federal Judges on the FISA court didn't say it was unconstitutional? Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 #8

It's not Unconstitutional. I explained this all here with appeals court case citations stevenleser Jun 2013 #11

thanks for that info nt steve2470 Jun 2013 #18

If the court says the sky is red, I will still know it is blue. Live and Learn Jun 2013 #20

Unless you are a Constitutional Law expert, you don't have the expertise to interpret it. stevenleser Jun 2013 #24

Unless you are an Authoritarian tool... 99Forever Jun 2013 #63

As your entire post is ad-hominem and devoid of facts, you are acknowledging I'm right. stevenleser Jun 2013 #64

"Authoritarian"!!! That's the battle cry of the Cha Jun 2013 #79

This tactic always amuses me. woo me with science Jun 2013 #97

Bacon? snooper2 Jun 2013 #66

Right on 99 Puzzledtraveller Jun 2013 #108

Article III courts are not in charge of sky color, but they are in charge of consitutionality arely staircase Jun 2013 #30

how many on here would agree with the courts that Citizens United is constitutional? liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #90

The federal courts also upheld laws ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #26

they are the keepers of what is constitutional arely staircase Jun 2013 #31

No, not really. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #33

by the courts arely staircase Jun 2013 #34

No, first by society who in turns puts the pressure on the courts. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #40

It has nothing to do with "authoritarian" any more than the "Yelling Fire in a Crowded Theater" stevenleser Jun 2013 #49

So they were wrong, and reversed themselves treestar Jun 2013 #38

So, whose to say they aren't screwing up now? ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #39

They might be treestar Jun 2013 #101

They did rule DOJ behaved unconstitutionally, as late as 2011. DirkGently Jun 2013 #58

It's not unconstitutional. Appeals courts have ruled on this again, and again. And the SCOTUS stevenleser Jun 2013 #9

The courts are wrong, just as they have been ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #41

No, they're not, just like the fire in a crowded theater exemption to the 1st amendment isnt wrong. stevenleser Jun 2013 #44

Nope..... ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #47

Wild rhetoric is not a substitute for an argument on Constitutional law. stevenleser Jun 2013 #50

I don't care if you think the argument is valid or not. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #53

I figured out that you didn't care about the facts long ago. No need to point it out. stevenleser Jun 2013 #65

You're just so clever. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #67

Keep telling yourself folks with the facts on their side are wrong and your suppositions are right stevenleser Jun 2013 #70

I'm doing real well in life, thank you. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #73

The OP tends to ignore the fact that the FISA court already ruled that the NSA broke law think Jun 2013 #84

One request for a warrant among thousands apparently exceeded FISA. Your point is not made. stevenleser Jun 2013 #103

And they are trying Aerows Jun 2013 #107

And now you distort the nature of the NSA law breaking to fit your meme think Jun 2013 #112

The SCOTUS would have to decide that.. DCBob Jun 2013 #10

And the SCOTUS repeatedly has denied cert. on these cases. They think the appeals courts decisions stevenleser Jun 2013 #14

Thats what I thought.. thanks for the clarification. DCBob Jun 2013 #25

The Supreme Court either hears or does not hear a case based on what they want to rule on indepat Jun 2013 #37

The SCOTUS denying cert goes back 60+ years on these issues. That's way beyond the current court. stevenleser Jun 2013 #45

It's not unconstitutional till there is a final court ruling that it's unconstitutional. pnwmom Jun 2013 #13

Actually these cases have come before fed. appeals courts a lot and FISA has been upheld, AND... stevenleser Jun 2013 #15

Thank you. I should have said that it hasn't been found unconstitutional pnwmom Jun 2013 #21

Except you're wrong about that, as you know. DirkGently Jun 2013 #59

It is rather disingenuous that some here refuse to acknowledge this fact think Jun 2013 #82

You know that prosecutors are denied some percentage of warrants all the time, right? stevenleser Jun 2013 #104

The word "warrant" isn't even mentioned in the article. Nor any of the other articles posted think Jun 2013 #113

It proves the administration thinks it doesn't have to discuss it. DirkGently Jun 2013 #116

There is never an end to this process. JackRiddler Jun 2013 #19

Wrong. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #43

No, its not Unconstitutional. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #46

That's what many people ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #48

That is not an argument. Plenty of laws are upheld as well. You have no basis for your assertions. stevenleser Jun 2013 #51

LOL ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #52

I know, you dont give a darn about the facts. You keep proving that over and over. nt stevenleser Jun 2013 #68

Unconstitutional = illegal even if it's a "law." JackRiddler Jun 2013 #16

Not really. The appeals courts rulings on this have said that as long as the target is a person or stevenleser Jun 2013 #22

You're mischaracterizing the entire issue. DirkGently Jun 2013 #60

No, I'm not. You don't understand what that means. stevenleser Jun 2013 #62

That's a mile of copypasta that says we have a FISA law. DirkGently Jun 2013 #115

No, no, and no. Your entire argument boils down to ignoring 60+ years of caselaw and stevenleser Jun 2013 #117

How then did the NSA break the law under both Bush & Obama? DirkGently Jun 2013 #118

"In the eye of the beholder" sibelian Jun 2013 #94

chef feinstein will reveal the meal as soon as the books are cooked enough nt msongs Jun 2013 #2

I think we'll get a bunch of paper with everything but the words "and" and "the" redacted. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #69

after all the lies, why SHOULD we believe the intel industry now? grasswire Jun 2013 #3

please protect me from the terrorists markiv Jun 2013 #5

eh. SammyWinstonJack Jun 2013 #12

So it sounds like they're letting Snowden/Greenwald force their hand? Tsk, tsk... ;) reformist2 Jun 2013 #6

FBI initiated 17 attacks Eddie Haskell Jun 2013 #17

Maybe they should do both. hrmjustin Jun 2013 #32

Like a definitive list of all the pot smoking cancer grannies the patriot act has caught? Warren DeMontague Jun 2013 #23

Hmmmmmm well it didn't stop the Bostan bombings. nt Raine Jun 2013 #27

Nothing will stop everything....were you expecting something to? VanillaRhapsody Jun 2013 #35

No, I was being sarcastic. nt Raine Jun 2013 #121

DiFi is as dirty as they come Vinnie From Indy Jun 2013 #28

She is a vile piece of shit. Senator War Profiteer. That she chairs the intelligence committee is cali Jun 2013 #88

Look forward to hearing about this. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #29

Why? How would it make this attack on civil liberties any less vile? bowens43 Jun 2013 #55

I'm always willing to listen to someone's side of anything. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #56

You can note there is a real fear there about this information. It runs through responses to this OP stevenleser Jun 2013 #72

An ideology that is uncomfortable with mass snooping of noncriminal American's information? Scootaloo Jun 2013 #81

An ideology that depends on denial of facts & characterization of any contrary information as "lies" stevenleser Jun 2013 #105

Agreed. This fear of being wrong is really amazing to observe. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #99

It depends on what we're supposed to be listening to, sibelian Jun 2013 #95

Well we'll be listening to something of great interest to all of us. BenzoDia Jun 2013 #110

Oh great: Sen. Dianne Feinstein claims that we need to surrender our privacy. cpwm17 Jun 2013 #36

If the information is to be declassified, was it improperly classified from the start? DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2013 #42

It doesnt matter whether or not it has stopped attacks bowens43 Jun 2013 #54

Right. We're told waterboarding & racial profiling work, too. DirkGently Jun 2013 #57

Senators Mark Udall and Ron Wyden call bullshit on claim metadata collection thwarted attacks Melinda Jun 2013 #61

Haven't you heard? Wyden and Udall are right wing shills. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #71

Who said they are right wing shills? Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 #86

I'll go with Wyden on this. hay rick Jun 2013 #75

Well, it sure stopped the Boston Marathon bombings The Second Stone Jun 2013 #74

You are demanding absolute 100% efficiency. GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #109

It really doesn't matter to me whether it thwarted terror attacks or not. Ms. Toad Jun 2013 #76

DiFi and Clapper...and CYA. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #77

Udall/Wyden say they have not seen any evidence NSA program has uniquely provided valuable intel dkf Jun 2013 #78

They stopped that criminal mastermind Doc_Technical Jun 2013 #80

Bullshit mick063 Jun 2013 #83

Spying upon, beating up and jailing Occupy Wall Street doesn't count. n/t Fire Walk With Me Jun 2013 #85

I stand with Feinstein 420superstoned420 Jun 2013 #87

Keep smoking. GeorgeGist Jun 2013 #89

WOW Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 #91

Enjoy your stay. JHB Jun 2013 #111

Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #114

So you think you've got the solution. It's not Democratic, is it? Judi Lynn Jun 2013 #119

The posts on this thread disgust me. I am no longer a democrat. This democratic party is liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #92

I'm sorry to hear that Cali_Democrat Jun 2013 #93

Bye bye. sibelian Jun 2013 #96

So sad. Harmony Blue Jun 2013 #106

"locking up Japanese-Americans was effective, there were no incidents of sabotage" Spider Jerusalem Jun 2013 #98

If DiFi said it was raining, I'd go and open the door and look outside. hobbit709 Jun 2013 #100

The outraged demanded to see proof the program has worked ... now that it looks like JoePhilly Jun 2013 #102

No. We want proof of what they are collecting marions ghost Jun 2013 #120