It's Not Nice To Fool Russian Collusion

The Atlantic?

They’re so far-left, they make centrists look like right-wingers.

Use non-partisan sites (if you can find any) if you want to get any traction in the Politics stream.

Genetic Fallacy. Examine the content, read it, then find what you disagree with.

At least do the bare minimum.

I did read it, and then I dismissed it because it was so full of left-wing bullshit that if it was an outhouse, it would’ve been swept away by its own contents.

This is the part where you ask the person who posted the article what parts they are referring to. Because sure, there may be some puff in there about left wing ideology, but no news story is without facts which are irrefutable. So then, what from The Atlantic was Rhondayes pointing at? Did you bother to ask them for another source?

“some puff…about left wing ideology”

It was ALL leftist BS.

“another source?”

In case you missed it, I advised them to “Use non-partisan sites”.

Did you give them examples?

Why should I do their research for them?

Because you were instructing them that their sources were wrong. Since you are setting the bar for what is and isn't acceptable in this stream, you should go further and show them what would be. Otherwise, you might as well go tell them to find some elbow grease and headlight fluid or muffler bearings a the hardware store.

-There’s a difference between ‘bias’ and ‘wrong’.

Even basic facts can be stated in such a way that it completely alters the meaning.

Example: Prolonged exposure to any of the 3 physical states Dihydrogen Monoxide can cause injury and death.

Saying it this way makes you think that it should be avoided at all costs.

However, the common name of the compound Dihydrogen Monoxide is…


wait for it…


WATER. Plain old water. H2O.

-I never said it was ‘unacceptable’ in the stream.

I informed them they should use non-partisan sites if they want any traction.

Do you ever win an argument without altering your opponent’s words to say something they obviously did not say?

“So, this begs the question, what part did you disagree with? What claim is he making with this article that you find au contraire?”

I disagree with the use of highly biased sites when replying to someone’s comment. In case you didn’t notice, Rhonda didn’t even make a claim. She just linked an article to a heavily biased ‘news media’ site.

“There's no discussion being held here, just a pontification of plugging your ears and buzzing as loudly as you can.”

There was no ‘discussion being held’ when Rhonda linked that article, but I don’t see you calling her out for her comment. Seems a little hypocritical. Wouldn’t that mean you’re the one pontificating and loudly buzzing?

So just ask her what she was referring to. Once you learn to start challenging what they provide you, the discussion (such as it is) gets harder and harder for them to hold without resorting to cop-outs in discussion.

And you're right, I failed to acknowledge that this person posted a claim to be paired with the article. In that, I want people to stop using the genetic fallacy to hold any sort of political discussion. Such cop-outs end any discussion being held and aren't constructive. In Politics as a topic, I seek only constructive discussion. There's a lot of emotional baggage in politics. When I was a kid, I hated the idea of politics and voting because of all the signs telling me how to vote. "VOTE YES ON ####" "VOTE NO ON ####" Or the really low blow advertisements in politics using false equivalencies, appeals to emotion, etc. That's when I was conservative.

I am by no means a model citizen of what I preach, and nobody is perfect.

I better stop rambling. I just had marijuana and am feeling very talkative.

And even after posting this comment, you still haven’t called out Rhondayes.

🤔

They can read.

While that is most likely true, saying it on MY comment is not the same as calling them out on THEIR comment because they will NOT receive a notification.

I directed them to this convo.

You should work on your ability to take constructive criticism. Crying out "Not fair, what about them?" Is really petty.

-Long after I called you out for being a hypocrite.

-“Constructive criticism” isn’t biased, which yours was, or else you would have called out Rhondayes at the same time as you did to me.

Four days and you still can't say what you disagree with in the article without using circular logic.
Also, what site did you use to check their bias? Did you check their factual reporting as well? How do they rate bias? Is it in stories covered or is it how the narrative is framed? Please, show your source.
-----

If there was no discussion, why did you reply to the person? Seems like a back and forth was being held. Instead of asking for clarification on the article to what they were referencing, in relation to the discussion, you just attacked it assuming all articles come from the same author under the Atlantic.

-Four days, and you still haven’t figured out that I disagree with using highly biased sources and the fact that I was calling someone out for doing so, even after I said that was I why I called them out.

-Every media bias site rates them left-biased. If you’re as intelligent as you think you are, a simple Google search and follow-up should be easy enough for you.

-There was “no discussion” because THEY didn't continue it. There can be no “back and forth” if they made a comment and then didn’t respond to my rebuttal. I guess that makes your reply a “logical fallacy”, doesn’t it?

Lol, can't answer a single question can you? What site did you use?

I checked multiple sites.

Why should I do it again when I know the answer?

Do it yourself and refute my findings.

Because, I want to compare notes. Do you think any good researcher just posts their claims without sources? 😂 There's a reason there's a "works cited" for any written piece.

Oh wait...

You're avoiding criticism because you don't want your source put into question...

... Got it.

I’m not ‘sharing’ my source because I don’t feel like going back through 4 days of browser history.

You should be able to find it yourself, unless typing less than 5 words and looking at the resulting links is too difficult.

Any one who ‘knows’ what a “good researcher” is capable of should be able to complete this task with little difficulty.

"Do you ever win an argument without altering your opponent’s words to say something they obviously did not say?"
That's a good question. I would've been able to accept that question and answer it, but you were too busy assuming I don't understand terminology within chemistry. I understand that you're trying to put the argument back on my lap when, like you, were simply trying to offer advice in a crass way that isn't very tactful.

"I never said it was ‘unacceptable’ in the stream. I informed them they should use non-partisan sites if they want any traction."
Arguing semantics is also not becoming of someone who wants to be taken seriously, as saying "unacceptable" is the same as "If you want to gain any traction..." for all intents and purposes within the context of this discussion.

"There’s a difference between ‘bias’ and ‘wrong’."
And still, you cannot read it because it exists. Challenge the reader, ask what they're referring to in their website that they cite, look at the claim, compare what you have, then consult the primary source.

That's how you debate.

Seems to me that you just backed out of the argument because of (as I said before) the genetic fallacy.

Read the text carefully, and understand what I've been pointing to since the beginning.

Thank you sir. Apparently, I hurt their (unsure who) feelings enough to the point that they had to flag two comments to get them deleted and a 48hr timer. Funny though, I never directly insulted them, just the positions that they took.

I feel bad for people that get so easily upset like that.

Genetic fallacy only counts if I dismissed the article because of who published it, not if I read the article and dismissed it because of it contents.

Try again.

Still genetic fallacy! 😂😂😂

Read the first part of the definition again, and you may just begin to understand why it’s placed first, instead of at the end like the part you think matters the most.

Try again.

How are those cherries you like to pick?

Wait, was that a confession I heard?

-Where did I say that you “don't understand terminology within chemistry” in my comment? Claiming that I did so is the perfect example of needing to alter a person’s words to win an argument.

-“Unacceptable in the stream” implies it’s against the rules. I never implied that in any way. Yet another alteration to win an argument.

-As I have already stated, I DID read it. How did you not understand it first TWO times I said it?

-Your claim of “genetic fallacy” has been refuted by the fact that I actually read the biased article. Keep pushing the lies, just like a good leftist always does.

"-Long after I called you out for being a hypocrite."
Calling me a hypocrite does not take away from your error. I've admitted my faults and worked to change them. You on the other hand, can't stand to have a light shone on you. You'd rather deflect to others and point at their faults than admit your error.

"-“Constructive criticism” isn’t biased, which yours was, or else you would have called out Rhondayes at the same time as you did to me."

My bias is weighted not by politics but by the caliber of the error made. While yes, the individual in question *did* submit only an article to you, it was a response. So, they were at least TRYING to communicate. You simply plugged your ears spouting "CaN't TrUsT tHe AtLaNtIc LeFt WiNg BuLlShIt" while failing to point out from the article why it was "Left Wing Bullshit."

If you're going to call people out for their alleged hypocrisy, do it honestly. Rhondayes was trying to communicate, you weren't.

-“your error”

Since the comment in question was nothing but a highly biased opinion piece, the only error was theirs. I was just calling it out, unlike you, who ignored it to attack someone who was on the other side of the political aisle instead of criticizing the original reply.

-“plugged your ears”

I see that you still can’t wrap your head around the fact that I read the article, and except for a small percentage of the entire thing that contained a few facts that were spouted in such a way that it altered the meaning, it was just highly biased BS that had virtually no relevance to the meme is was responding to.

-“Rhondayes was trying to communicate”

Now it’s my turn to be “calling bullshit on this claim” because if she was trying to communicate instead of just trying to troll the OP, she would’ve responded to my comment at some point during the last 4 days.

This is only more proof you can't take constructive criticism without getting defensive.

Says the guy only took “constructive criticism” after being called out multiple times for his hypocrisy.

As opposed to the guy who hasn't?

No.

As opposed to the guy who hasn’t been a hypocrite for most of this argument.

A guy who has been a hypocrite for "most" of this argument vs. a guy who has deflected blame for this "entire" argument.

I'll take that.

Your insecurity is transparent.

The blame rests solely on the person who deflected from the original argument…

…which would be you.

"The blame rests solely on the person who deflected from the original argument…

…which would be you."

Still deflecting? Fragile ego gonna be fragile.

Still defending your deflection?

Fragile leftist egos can’t help but be fragile.

I mean I would go on to address these points, but you're still plugging your ears and trying to point the finger elsewhere. This discussion is about your reply and the error in it, you keep trying to make it about others.

Last time:

-“plugged your ears”

I see that you still can’t wrap your head around the fact that I read the article, and except for a small percentage of the entire thing that contained a few facts that were spouted in such a way that it altered the meaning, it was just highly biased BS that had virtually no relevance to the meme is was responding to.

-“your error”

Since the comment in question was nothing but a highly biased opinion piece, the only error was theirs. I was just calling it out, unlike you, who ignored it to attack someone who was on the other side of the political aisle instead of criticizing the original reply.

And I love you you totally ignored the fact that Rhondayes hasn’t replied to any comment, which completely decimates your “Rhondayes was trying to communicate” claim.

"Factual reporting using a heavy left bias can easily alter the narrative to say something that sounds far different than what the facts actually say, which can be easily done as I have shown in a previous reply."

All sites show left-center or moderate. What information do you have that I don't? You're talking nonsense.

"Who TF mentioned A.J. during this? Sounds like you needed to deflect the argument AGAIN. Lol."

Ad Fontes did, in their chart showing every news media outlet. I figured you would know who he is, and he was showing the most extreme right. Thus, I was using that as a basis of reference. You are that simple to make that assumption though.

"BTW, love the insults. Do you leftists always resort to them in the end, or just when you’re being decimated in the argument?"

Funny, I was mocking the usual drivel I hear from the right, if I was going to insult you on my terms, I doubt you'd know it. I was using words you would understand.

Now that I've checked everything off you could complain about, I'm outs. You still havent:

Said what's wrong with the article
Stated what media checker you used
Admitted your error.

I have:
Admitted my error,
Did my own searching for the topic, trying to corroborate your claim across the top 3 webresults for a bias checker.
Redirected the person here.

Your take, is an absolute dumpster fire. I can see why it's so easy for politicians to manipulate their audience if you're any representation. You've shown no capacity for individual thought or critical thinking. You have the platform of a floppy dead fish, failing to meet any challenge. What cowardice. G'day, kiddo.

I'm sorry, I typically ignore things that are so trivial that I can't believe you're making it an issue. All I see you do is complain, complain, complain. I mean jesus christ, seriously. God forbid your ego be compromised point the finger at others, shift the blame. For the record? When you called it out, I did admit my error.

You're still trying to point the finger.

And that's the bottom line.

“complain, complain, complain”

Says the guy complaining about how I called out someone’s bullshit.

“try to shift the blame”

Says the guy who tried to shift the blame from Rhondayes to me since his first comment.

“(Insert your super long reply here)”

Factual reporting using a heavy left bias can easily alter the narrative to say something that sounds far different than what the facts actually say, which can be easily done as I have shown in a previous reply.

Who TF mentioned A.J. during this? Sounds like you needed to deflect the argument AGAIN. Lol.

BTW, love the insults. Do you leftists always resort to them in the end, or just when you’re being decimated in the argument?

“You mean the hypocrisy in which I admitted my error two replies after you made the point?”

No. I mean how you continue to say I’m deflecting while continuing to deflect from the original cause of the argument.

“You mean the hypocrisy in Where you ... *checks notes* ... Still haven't admitted your fault because you have a fragile ego.”

Since all I did was call out Rhondayes for using a link to highly biased site, there was no “fault” except in your opinion.

Please, try to shift the blame again and make my point more valid than it already is.

“And ya didn’t disappoint”

Neither did you with your continued hypocrisy.

Still cant answer what site you used to check for bias, and you still can't answer what issue you had with the article.

You debate like a freshman. You don't argue.
So far -
You point the finger
Plug your ears,
And ignore based on what some other website told you to think.
Classic Right Wing Nut Job can't engage on the merits.

You can deflect blame all you want, and say that it's all me, but you're the one who cant walk the walk. Until you do, my work here is done.

imgflip.com/i/7mfs36?nerp=1685138754#com25900365

imgflip.com/i/7mfs36#com25872897

[“complain, complain, complain”

Says the guy complaining about how I called out someone’s bullshit.

“try to shift the blame”

Says the guy who tried to shift the blame from Rhondayes to me since his first comment.]

"You're still trying to point the finger."
Please, try to shift the blame again and make my point more valid than it already is."

Follow up: imgflip.com/i/7mfs36?nerp=1684975976#com25866352