@blatham,
blatham wrote:
What point still stands? Obviously not the claim you made as it does not come anywhere near being accurate. If you wish to say that there were approximately 2X the number of riots during Obama's term than the previous year, that would a justifiable claim. But if you wish to go further and make a secondary claim that Obama or his policies were causal, then you are going to have to do far more work than I expect you are prepared to do.
When have you ever met this standard yourself ? You blithely assert vast "conspiracies of movement conservtism" and "the evil Koch brothers" with nothing more than your own ufounded assertions, and, when pressed, offer nothing more than some juornalist's equally unfounded assertion as "proof".
Who or what gives you the authority to lay out such "expectations" for others ? Perhaps you do really believe you are the schoolmaster here and the others here really do sit at your feet awaiting the bits that fall from your hands, as you ( I now think seriously) indicated earlier. Some here do indeed appear to rather slavishly submit ( tho' I find it sadly pathetic) . I hope Tony isn't fool enough to take the bait.
blatham wrote:
And you continue to avoid my question regarding what information sources you attend to. You know many of mine as I have entered them here. And that's a partial picture of what I read every day and have for years. So, please respond. I'd rather not put you on ignore but I will if you're not honest.
Some remarkable, and perhaps revealing, posturing on your part here, and accompanied by a rather presumptious threat, don't you think?
Are you the judge of who here is honest? We all have opinions, but only delusional people believe they have a right to impose them on others. You wield the ignore feature as though is is a weapon of punishment that others must necessarily fear. I find that a bit .... strange and unreal.
