You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #20: I pointed out blatant hypocrisy [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Tactical Progressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-14-08 04:46 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. I pointed out blatant hypocrisy
Because it's right there.

Let me first address the emotions around this. I didn't call you a hypocrite. The actions, not the man. I specifically directed my words at your OP. So you're already escalating inaccurately. Additionally, you just inferred I'm being freeperish. When in I was merely being factual, which I'll address. But staying on this, I believe that pointing out hypocrisy is WELL within all discourse guidelines, while calling out others as freepers is not. Now, I don't really care, but it seems to me that under any circumstances, let alone that I was accurate and you are not, that your offense is by DU guidelines greater. I don't really want to get bogged down in that, even if you seem bent on it. Back to the point.

You shouldn't tolerate being called a hypocrite, if someone does that, and if it's not true. Here, nobody did that and it is true that your OP was hypocritical, so you're far away from having any justifiable claim.

You had a choice when you made your OP with pretensions to the high road, decrying the cross-currents of animosity that, regardless of who's more culpable, are hurting the party. You could have taken no side, which is the usual choice for such an 'above it all' declaration. Or you could have pointed out inconsistencies or failures or whatnot of both sides and posited the case that opposing failures and/or dishonesties cancel themselves out, in the end leaving us all hurt for no clear advantage.

Instead what you did was claim the high road while dissing the Clintons alone, which is, by any definition, hypocritical. The only thing not to be tolerated here is your OP, in which you tell everyone to just stop, after you get your digs in that the Clintons are the cause of it all.

If anyone owes an apology here, it's you. For that OP - I don't require one.

And by the way, since I took all this time to explain your misconceptions about your own failed thread proclamation, let me just say that I think the Clintons have behaved totally above board and that there is no doubt that it is Obama's camp that has clearly fomented race-baiting with their 'fairytale is a racist codeword' and 'creditting LBJ's accomplishments is racist' claims. But I didn't do that, and more importantly, you don't GET to do that in an OP pretending to be built on neutrality. Not without being called on it.

You aren't owed an apology. You owe one, Mythsaje, at least this time. You're usually alot better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC