Progressives (Liberals)

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

I couldn't find this phrase in the quote you provided.

Look closer at these two phrases:

Cut services to save money so he could give the rich even more breaks.

Cut taxes for the rich.

hightor wrote:

Rather than putting words into Moore's mouth,

I did not put any words in his mouth.

hightor wrote:

why don't you offer some effective refutations of the points?

I did.

Moore was wrong about the reason why the state government took over Flint.

Moore was wrong about the reason why Flint started using the river as their water supply.

Moore was wrong about the governor trying to cover up the crisis.

Moore was wrong to say that the Detroit water system should not be referred to as Detroit water.

Moore was probably wrong to state that the reason for not treating the water was to save money. We don't actually know the reason, but since the treatment was so cheap, his stated reason is unlikely.

That's four major errors and a likely fifth that I pointed out.

hightor wrote:

Paying for tax cuts by cutting services is a well-known method of municipal budget balancing.

Perhaps, but that is not what happened in this case. The emergency manager takeover of Flint had nothing to do with any tax cuts. It was entirely about leftists running the city into the ground just like leftists always do to places where voters are foolish enough to put them in charge.

hightor wrote:

I note your incapacity to point out anything he says that's factually incorrect.

You are wrong. I pointed out four definitely untrue claims by him and an additional fifth claim that can't be proven and is unlikely to be true.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I did not put any words in his mouth.

Look more closely at your quoted words:

oralloy wrote:

...an evil Republican plot to pay for tax cuts for the rich

I hope you'll note my ability to point out statements of yours which are factually incorrect.

Quote:

I did.

No you just pointed to particular items you disagree with and claimed them to be incorrect. An unsubstantiated denial is hardly a "refutation". So maybe you'd like to illustrate how Moore was wrong, i.e. provide facts to effectively back up your claims. We'll all be waiting.

2 Replies

@hightor,

Facts? To back up his claims? Oralloy?
Like waiting for fricking Godot.

1 Reply

@snood,

Don't be so dishonorable. I've always provided prompt cites to back up my claims whenever people have requested them.

0 Replies

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Look more closely at your quoted words:

oralloy wrote:
...an evil Republican plot to pay for tax cuts for the rich

Yes. My characterization of Moore's writing was quite accurate.

hightor wrote:

I hope you'll note my ability to point out statements of yours which are factually incorrect.

You have not pointed out any incorrect statements on my part.

hightor wrote:

No you just pointed to particular items you disagree with and claimed them to be incorrect.

I also gave a good explanation as to how Moore's statements were wrong.

hightor wrote:

An unsubstantiated denial is hardly a "refutation".

I disagree. But if anyone finds any of my claims questionable, they are free to ask me for a cite.

hightor wrote:

So maybe you'd like to illustrate how Moore was wrong, i.e. provide facts to effectively back up your claims. We'll all be waiting.

I've already provided a cite proving that Moore was untruthful about this being about tax cuts for the rich.

Which other claim or claims of mine would you like a cite for?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

My characterization of Moore's writing was quite accurate.

Okay; here's what you said:

Quote:

So do you now agree that this Moore character was not being truthful when he said that the takeover was an evil Republican plot to pay for tax cuts for the rich??

He didn't say anything about it being "evil": you did. If you're going to "characterize" a person's words don't preface your opinionated interpretation by saying "he said..." That's dishonest. And rather dumb when all the text is there to show that you lied.

1 Reply

@hightor,

That's sophistry.

Back when I debunked Moore's claims I said that I anticipated that no one would actually challenge me for a cite.

It looks like I called that one right.

I do however anticipate many more pages of hysteria from the left as they try to cope with the fact that I've proven that Moore's claims are untrue.

1 Reply

An argument with Oralloy is like a chess game with a pigeon. No matter what your move, he just walks around, shits on everything, then struts off like he won.

2 Replies

@snood,

Leftists sure don't like it when people post facts.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

what leftists (sic) don't like is when rightists post opinion and supposition as facts.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Leftists sure don't like... facts.

I'm sure the majority have no issues with facts. Problem is that many of the right leaning media outlets, don't do well in distilling facts.

If it's any consolation, the rambunctious left, has been known to fail too.
...just not as often and in general not to such ludicrous degrees.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

what leftists (sic) don't like is when rightists post opinion and supposition as facts.

You cannot point out a single place where I have ever done such a thing.

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Sturgis wrote:

I'm sure the majority have no issues with facts.

The tantrums that leftists throw when confronted by facts indicate otherwise.

Sturgis wrote:

Problem is that many of the right leaning media outlets, don't do well in distilling facts.

That's OK. We don't need right wing media outlets. I'm here, and I do extremely well in distilling facts.

Sturgis wrote:

If it's any consolation, the rambunctious left, has been known to fail too.
...just not as often and in general not to such ludicrous degrees.

I on the other hand seldom fail. And when I do it is typically only a trivial error.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

That's sophistry.

What is? Demonstrating your rhetorical sleight of hand?

Quote:

Back when I debunked Moore's claims I said that I anticipated that no one would actually challenge me for a cite.

You didn't debunk anything. You just copied conservative talking points. Your bias is laughably evident. Olivier countered several of your points successfully.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

Do you think the intellect is more revered on the left than the right?

Probably by a particular sub-set of the right. Not the MAGA mobs, however.

0 Replies

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

oralloy wrote:
That's sophistry.

What is?

Your pretending that my use of the word evil makes a meaningful difference between "what I said" and "what Moore said" is sophistry.

hightor wrote:

Demonstrating your rhetorical sleight of hand?

No such sleight of hand.

hightor wrote:

You didn't debunk anything.

That is incorrect. I pointed out four things that Moore said that are demonstrably untrue. And I pointed out a fifth thing that he said that can't be proved and is probably untrue.

hightor wrote:

You just copied conservative talking points.

That is incorrect. I copied nothing. All of my posts come directly from me.

That's why you can't point out any errors in my posts. Had I copied someone else, you might have been able to find an error.

hightor wrote:

Your bias is laughably evident.

Your inability to point out anything that I am wrong about speaks for itself.

hightor wrote:

Olivier countered several of your points successfully.

That is incorrect. He tried twice. Both attempts were failures.

In the case of the reason why Flint switched to river water, his own cite proved me right.

In the other case, his nitpicking about the meaning of bankruptcy would not have undermined my point even if he had been right. And he wasn't right even in his pointless nitpicking. I provided a reliable cite that proved that the term bankruptcy did describe Flint's situation.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Your pretending that my use of the word evil makes a meaningful difference between "what I said" and "what Moore said" is sophistry.

oralloy wrote:

Olivier's nitpicking about the meaning of bankruptcy would not have undermined my point even if he had been right.

I should add that your sophistry is meaningless nitpicking as well.

Even if you had been correct about my use of the term "evil" supposedly imparting a different meaning to the sentence, that would not change the fact that Moore's statement about "tax cuts for the rich" is completely untrue.

0 Replies

In very lefty Portland Or two days ago it took police 9 hours to talk a person off of a bridge over an Interstate Highway, during which time they shut down all lanes in one direction, jamming up the roads regionally, disrupting so many lives, causing so much economic damage and as well environmental damage with increased production of C02.

The dynamite for progressives is just how poorly the cities they control are run.

The dynamite for progressives is that performance actually matters.

That what sounds good is not the end of the day.

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2019/07/man-on-portland-highway-overpass-closes-part-of-eastbound-i-84.html

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Right. He was probably mentally disadvantaged. They should have shot him in order to alleviate the traffic jam.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Right. He was probably mentally disadvantaged. They should have shot him in order to alleviate the traffic jam.

Alternately he is a drugged up attention seeker who was just allowed to on a whim degrade the lives of the better part of a million people, and cause millions of dollars worth of economic damage, and untold amount of environmental damage..... because the people who run Portland are deeply ignorant.

1 Reply

Progressives (Liberals)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know