Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of a discussion instigated regarding Greenwald's character [View all]grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)90. Ad hominem attacks are a known fallacy. Typical smear tactics.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
196 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of a discussion instigated regarding Greenwald's character [View all]
sibelian
Feb 2014
OP
What does that mean? Republican Whistle Blowers exposed Bush's crimes during his administration.
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#172
It's McCarthyite bullshit and very often couched in homophbia. It has gone on for
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2014
#15
Examining multiple examples of Greenwald's style of argument and his history convinced me
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#17
That's fine as long as you refute the reporting on the NSA rather than attack his character. n/t
cui bono
Feb 2014
#113
Where are the insults to Du members in the OP? And case closed is about attacking the messenger,
cui bono
Feb 2014
#115
"A small cohort of losers are smarting over their loss." could be interpreted as such
dionysus
Feb 2014
#157
They dont discuss issues but only disrupt. Why they are allowed to stay is beyond me. nm
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#150
and unlike greenwald, they won't be making a living doing it. checkbook journalism 101
dionysus
Feb 2014
#156
But that's all they have. They cannot argue substance and they cannot argue law.
bemildred
Feb 2014
#18
And everybody should vote third-party, because it's so much easier than making a serious
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#29
And to those that disparage whistle-blowers and Occupy this should make you happy.
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#147
You won't get the NSA shut down -- and you won't get much of the public behind you
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#37
Yes, Totally impossible, Ridiculous really. Fatuous. I suggest you stop worrying about it.
bemildred
Feb 2014
#41
That style won't work either. It may make you feel witty and morally superior, but
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#43
Good grief, bemildred. Why would I give a fugg who or what you "believed in"?
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#56
If you spend just half the time you spend pissing and moaning on this website...
ConservativeDemocrat
Feb 2014
#108
No. He shouldn't resign. He should do his job and not be intimidated by the big brass in the NSA.
JDPriestly
Feb 2014
#36
So you are giving Pres Obama credit for starting to fix what he and you said wasnt broken.
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#130
If you're supporting Snowden despite him handing the Chinese government
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#26
Anyone who supports the excessive surveillance of the NSA is unlikely to vote for Democrats
JDPriestly
Feb 2014
#33
You've got to stop thinking in terms of slogans and start thinking in terms
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#42
Could you please list a few of the policy reforms you are talking about? Thanks.
JDPriestly
Feb 2014
#70
You haven't seen any evidence that the NSA is doing this to American citizens, either.
randome
Feb 2014
#72
I saw no slogans in JD Priestly's comment. That tactic is so old but DUers, as this thread
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#174
You should look up the S China Morning Post article and review its effect on the Obama-Xi summit
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#40
Could be, if it was an isolated incident -- but over and over again Snowden and pals
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#59
Defending Snowden won't produce NSA changes: it drives the debate in the wrong direction
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#46
look at the upper right panel of this cartoon from 2006. a lot of us knew a long ass time ago.
dionysus
Feb 2014
#159
And if you feed them bullshizz, instead of good information, they'll start running away
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#52
Actually a majority of the American people are on her side. It is your position that appears
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#168
ROFL +1000 Shhh, we're not allowed to say anything bad, no matter how true it is. Of course,
okaawhatever
Feb 2014
#89
Agreed. Don't take the bait when you see an OP filled with personal attacks and logical fallacies.
pa28
Feb 2014
#124
OH BULL!! If Greenwald had a clue what real journalism is he would understand that it is his
Douglas Carpenter
Feb 2014
#78
I've seen far more character fluffing for Greenwald on the Internet than character assassination.
TheMathieu
Feb 2014
#102
Why would someone need faith? This isn't church and these players aren't gods or saints.
TheKentuckian
Feb 2014
#144
I've been using Full Ignore on what I believe are paid operatives that attack GG or ES
davidlynch
Feb 2014
#107
Thank you, thank you! It's a disinformation tactic, and there's a certain contingent here
truth2power
Feb 2014
#125
Those you refer to have nothing left to post but hatred. They have nothing to say about
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#131
"Isn't Greenwald sitting on the very same secrets that the NSA is/was?" We really dont
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#136
Are you pulling my leg? Trust Congress? LOL. Good grief Charlie Brown. nm
rhett o rick
Feb 2014
#140
Just look at the number of recs (I'm 201) at this point… If it was all about "character"...
MrMickeysMom
Feb 2014
#153
His actions have revealed nothing ground breaking and will not result in reforms.
joshcryer
Feb 2014
#154
actually, there's more than a "small cohort" of people who can recognize that Greenwald is a
dionysus
Feb 2014
#155
Thank you, this needs to be repeated as often as the smears appear on this Democratic forum. And
sabrina 1
Feb 2014
#160
It'll never stop. Pavlovian Propaganda is all the scoundrels have. n/t
whatchamacallit
Feb 2014
#166
The character of the journalist is always relevant to the credibility of their reporting.
Chan790
Feb 2014
#178
The credibility of Greenwald's critics has been absent for me since that 'I found out Greenwald
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2014
#186