DIYbanter - View Single Post

(Doug Miller) wrote in
m:

In article . 201,
Nate Perkins wrote:
Doug Miller wrote in
om:

In article . 201,
says...
[...]

Anyone reading the Cincinatti speech reasonably would
come to the conclusion that WMDs and terror links are the main
theme of the speech.

Anyone reading the Cincinnati speech reasonably would come to the
conclusion that the President *did*, in fact, talk about bringing
freedom and democracy to Iraq.

But you claimed that he didn't.

You are right. The president did mention freedom and democracy in the
Cincinatti speech. I was engaging in hyperbole when I said he didn't
"make a peep" about that. There is a peep there.

No, you were not "engaging in hyperbole" and you know it. You were
lying.

Why do I have the impression that anyone who sees things differently
than you must by "lying?"

What hubris.

And you're lying now: there's more than "a peep" there, as anyone who
reads the speech can see, and you know it.

Criminy. If the shoe were on the other foot you'd be whining at me
about the definition of "peep" so we could quantify whether or not
there's a "peep" there.

The thesis is clearly not the spread of freedom and democracy. The
thesis is the danger of Iraqi WMDs and Iraqi terror links. You do know
how to spot a thesis? It comes at the beginning of the speech (not in
paragraph 42).

As I said befo if you don't appreciate being called a liar, refrain
from making posts that contain clearly obvious and readily
demonstrable falsehoods.

Yet another insult. Not surprising.