Climmate Change? - Look at this (Page 7): ..and the context of you citing out of context quotes is limited to only those from liberals provides sufficient context to show selective use...

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

You are mistaken to think that I thinks me superio... (show quote)

..and the context of you citing out of context quotes is limited to only those from liberals provides sufficient context to show selective use of all information sources.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

You might be right. Give me a dumb comment by a liberal on this forum and we'll see.

Go to the very beginning and read the very first liberal post from Brian - or perhaps you thought it an intellectually sound posting

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

..and the context of you citing out of context quotes is limited to only those from liberals provides sufficient context to show selective use of all information sources.

Quite the contrary, libs took Huckaby out of context when he said that democrats waned to make women feel like they weren't worthy unless Mr Sugar (I'm paraphrasing) would give them free birth control since they couldn't control their libido's. But it's Huckaby. He's kind of a joke without the help of taking him out of context.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

Go to the very beginning and read the very first liberal post from Brian - or perhaps you thought it an intellectually sound posting

The comment about John Birch society? Or the one where he questions using the Tea Party websight for a source?

I agree with the second regarding using the Tea Party websight. I'm not familiar with John Birch although have heard the name.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

Quite the contrary, libs took Huckaby out of context when he said that democrats waned to make women feel like they weren't worthy unless Mr Sugar (I'm paraphrasing) would give them free birth control since they couldn't control their libido's. But it's Huckaby. He's kind of a joke without the help of taking him out of context.

Certainly no bias shown in this response -

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

The comment about John Birch society? Or the one where he questions using the Tea Party websight for a source?

I agree with the second regarding using the Tea Party websight. I'm not familiar with John Birch although have heard the name.

So, simply discrediting a source websight (sic) is valid and referring to a long ago person or society with no relevancy at all to the subject matter doesn't qualify for loony comments - as long as it is a fellow liberal, I see it very clearly now - thanks for the clarification

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

Certainly no bias shown in this response -

Heck, if Huckabee were a liberal democrat I'd be biased against him. He's just too condescending and patronizing for me.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

So, simply discrediting a source websight (sic) is valid and referring to a long ago person or society with no relevancy at all to the subject matter doesn't qualify for loony comments - as long as it is a fellow liberal, I see it very clearly now - thanks for the clarification

I don't know about John Birch so I have no opinion. But the Tea Party News Network is well known for distorting and twisting the t***h. This article posted here on this thread is a good example.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

Heck, if Huckabee were a liberal democrat I'd be biased against him. He's just too condescending and patronizing for me.

Context my friend, a word used by liberals but rarely applied to what who they support and who they damn.

At first, in citing examples of taking something out of contest, you could only come up with cases where you think it happened to liberals. When challenged on that, you can only come up with an example on a person who you can't avoid slamming and, in context, justifying taking him out of context.

The irony is that you are every bit as guilty for what you slam others

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

I don't know about John Birch so I have no opinion. But the Tea Party News Network is well known for distorting and twisting the t***h. This article posted here on this thread is a good example.

I have no doubt that this source has a bias, just as I have no doubt that liberal sites have biases. However, on any given article I am willing to believe they may very well be reporting factually without great bias.

As a matter of fact just today I posted on OPP an article from Huffingtonpost - a cite that is as well known for distorting and twisting.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

Context my friend, a word used by liberals but rarely applied to what who they support and who they damn.

At first, in citing examples of taking something out of contest, you could only come up with cases where you think it happened to liberals. When challenged on that, you can only come up with an example on a person who you can't avoid slamming and, in context, justifying taking him out of context.

The irony is that you are every bit as guilty for what you slam others

You wish. But all too wrong. I pointed out the lib example and said I don't like Huckabee. That only seems to be a justification in your mind.

These are the big three I could remember off the top of my head. If you can give an example of myself doing it on this forum go for it.

Add to that, I am a conservative, not a liberal. How can that be!? you might ask. It can be because the entirety of conservatism isn't based upon g****l w*****g denial and gun tote'in, survivalist, bible banging red neckism.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

You wish. But all too wrong. I pointed out the l... (show quote)

Calling yourself a conservative while consistently finding fault with conservatives in defense of liberals causes real confusion - more to yourself than others.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

Calling yourself a conservative while consistently finding fault with conservatives in defense of liberals causes real confusion - more to yourself than others.

That's because so many "conservatives" are all or none. Common sense says it just shouldn't be so. Its then incorrect to assume that disagreement with a "conservative" position means that one is a liberal.

Many "conservatives" act like they are a part of a "church" of sorts.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

nwtk2007 wrote:

That's because so many "conservatives" are all or none. Common sense says it just shouldn't be so. Its then incorrect to assume that disagreement with a "conservative" position means that one is a liberal.

Many "conservatives" act like they are a part of a "church" of sorts.

You can't stop exposing yourself, can you? When one writes a half t***h he is showing his bias for the half missing - a true and balanced statement would be "many conservatives and man liberals act like they are part of a church of sorts.

Try balance, you might like it.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Dave wrote:

You can't stop exposing yourself, can you? When one writes a half t***h he is showing his bias for the half missing - a true and balanced statement would be "many conservatives and man liberals act like they are part of a church of sorts.

Try balance, you might like it.

I see your point. However, one usually doesn't see such one sided positions taken by those you might deem "liberal".