Reply #110: According to your reply you would not respect rational dissent either.

[bluedawg12]

>>As soon as the "dissenters" can make a rational case based on facts, void of knee-jerk reactions from sensationalized headlines, and not run and hide every time someone asks for a link to verify their claims, then they'll be worthy of having an intellectual conversation with. - wyldwolf<<


As soon as the "dissenters" can make a rational case based on facts

No argument there.

This next part is where you strain credibility and lapse into subjective, prejorative, interpretation.

"void of knee-jerk reactions from sensationalized headlines"

I guess you mean "devoid" rather than, "void."

This is a subjective spin and pejorative and a sign of a priori disrespect and a biased point of view.

"and not run and hide every time someone asks for a link to verify their claims"

What kind of link? Specify.

Link to an article or news media source? That's double bind, as according to you, a newspaper or journalist source is just "sensationalized headlines."

Or are you referring to a link about another thread here at DU? In which case you still haven't read the rules, have you?

"then they'll be worthy of having an intellectual conversation with."

Is that ending with the preposition: "with"?

Anyway, as much fun as this is, you just failed. No one needs to be worthy to converse with you or any other fellow human being. Elitism is so, well, elitist.

"Worthy" or "worthiness" is simply not a progressive idea.

You are not credible in your statement and assertion wyldwolf, that you would treat dissenting opinions with respect. You tipped your hand my friend.

Look up and see the issues mentioned by the OP. They are concerns that have been voiced as areas of progressive policy that we as Democrats have the right and duty to monitor.

You are defending a man, a President, that does not need this type of defense. He does not encourage this type of lame defense, with arbitrary amateur criteria that slip from a good premise, namely, a fact based discussion and lapses into childish mud slinging, like "knee jerk," and "sensationalized headlines" and "run and hide" and demanding that fellow progressives be worthy of your reply. :rofl:

**If you don't like an OP ignore it.

**If you disagree with an OP, state why.

Save the rest of this none sense for some other venue and stop defending that which does not need your defense.

The OP was spot on and is in good company.

Our country is only a democracy if we make it a democracy, because elections alone do not make us a democracy especially when those elections are so heavily influenced by money. What makes us a democracy is the ability of ordinary citizens to make a difference, the Constitution gives us the power to make that difference but the Constitution is only effective if we stand up and exercise our rights. If you support what Obama is doing then by all means get behind him, but realize that in a democracy not everyone is going to agree with him on all the issues and those of us who have disagreements will not be silent. - Bjorn Against


This victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were.”
- President Barack Obama
Election victory speech
Victory speech in Grant Park, Chicago, Illinois (4 November 2008)

"We are on our own, and have only our own reason and our judgment to rely on."
-The Audacity of Hope (2006)