Jump to content

Republican Hypocrisy Part II.....


Recommended Posts

This is the second in a 24-part series that exposes the blatant hypocrisy of the GOTP. Here is more policy the republicans were for before America elected a dark-skinned Democrat as President.

 

Hypocrite |ˈhip' əˌkrit| noun

1. A person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2. A person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

 

 

This involves the Nuclear START Treaty:

 

The Nuclear START Treaty) Republicans shamelessly filibustered the ratification of the Obama START Treaty for quite a period of time and criticized it tremendously and continue to try and find ways to circumvent the treaty today. What Republicans conveniently forget is that Ronald Reagan, the man that Republicans worship like a God, negotiated the very first START Treaty which was signed by yet another Republican, George H. W. Bush in 1991. That treaty expired in 2009 so President Obama negotiated a new one to continue the Reagan legacy. But since President Obama negotiated this treaty, Republicans retreated from Reagan’s policy faster than the decade it took to create the START Treaty in the first place.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dumbass, you don't name something the same and then assume it's the same.

Reagan reduce nuclear arms in exchange for the USSR reducing their nuclear arms, and each side verified what the other side was doing.

Obama capitulated because he's a spineless moron who would eagerly, and unilaterally eliminate our nuclear arsenal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your first mistake is in assuming they are the same.

 

Reagan veterans, Edwin Meese III and Richard Perle, argued in the WSJ that Obama would not have Reagan's endorsement, regardless of Obama's attempt to invoke Reagan. Reagan, they said, would have considered the verification regime inadequate and known that it would lead to constraints on American missile defense plans.

 

“The main reason Reagan would have objected to this treaty is that it may well undermine his dream that our country might one day be shielded by a missile defense system from nuclear attack."

 

“President Reagan knew that in arms control, the U.S. should play to win, and negotiate from a position of strength.”

 

They called Obama’s citations of Reagan “a brazen act of misappropriation.”



You dumbass, you don't name something the same and then assume it's the same.

Reagan reduce nuclear arms in exchange for the USSR reducing their nuclear arms, and each side verified what the other side was doing.

Obama capitulated because he's a spineless moron who would eagerly, and unilaterally eliminate our nuclear arsenal.

AKA, yeah, what he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dumbass, you don't name something the same and then assume it's the same.

Reagan reduce nuclear arms in exchange for the USSR reducing their nuclear arms, and each side verified what the other side was doing.

Obama capitulated because he's a spineless moron who would eagerly, and unilaterally eliminate our nuclear arsenal.

You're rhetoric is indicative of a hypocrite.

 

Your first mistake is in assuming they are the same.

 

Reagan veterans, Edwin Meese III and Richard Perle, argued in the WSJ that Obama would not have Reagan's endorsement, regardless of Obama's attempt to invoke Reagan. Reagan, they said, would have considered the verification regime inadequate and known that it would lead to constraints on American missile defense plans.

 

“The main reason Reagan would have objected to this treaty is that it may well undermine his dream that our country might one day be shielded by a missile defense system from nuclear attack."

 

“President Reagan knew that in arms control, the U.S. should play to win, and negotiate from a position of strength.”

 

They called Obama’s citations of Reagan “a brazen act of misappropriation.”

 

AKA, yeah, what he said.

And the blatant hypocrisy continues.........

You right wingnut pinheads are consistent, I'll give you that much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the second in a 24-part series that exposes the blatant hypocrisy of the GOTP. Here is more policy the republicans were for before America elected a dark-skinned Democrat as President.

 

Hypocrite |ˈhip' əˌkrit| noun

1. A person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2. A person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

 

 

This involves the Nuclear START Treaty:

 

The Nuclear START Treaty) Republicans shamelessly filibustered the ratification of the Obama START Treaty for quite a period of time and criticized it tremendously and continue to try and find ways to circumvent the treaty today. What Republicans conveniently forget is that Ronald Reagan, the man that Republicans worship like a God, negotiated the very first START Treaty which was signed by yet another Republican, George H. W. Bush in 1991. That treaty expired in 2009 so President Obama negotiated a new one to continue the Reagan legacy. But since President Obama negotiated this treaty, Republicans retreated from Reagan’s policy faster than the decade it took to create the START Treaty in the first place.

 

 

Ignore moron58...the START treaty was passed by a huge bipartisan vote....don't believe me? Here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/02/02/new-start-treaty-signed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lets see.

 

Gitmo...nope

 

Transparency...nope

 

Debt control...nope

 

Economic recovery...nope

 

UE control...nope

 

Shall I continue?

 

Nope. I think everyone gets the idea, even those like the one that started this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the hypocrisy from the right continues......

"We can't be havin' no dark-skinned librul extendin' the policies of dat great r'publikan God Reagan! That's jes tain't right!"

Poor 58, having trouble keeping up with the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. Just what can be expected from the right wingnut lunatic fringe. They bathe in hypocrisy, drink it for breakfast, plug their brains into it on talk radio and FAUX Noise, dream about it, smear it all over like cheap cologne.

Republicans = Hypocrites = Republicans.

All because of a Democrat - and a black one at that - in the White House. Pathetic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You dumbass, you don't name something the same and then assume it's the same.

Reagan reduce nuclear arms in exchange for the USSR reducing their nuclear arms, and each side verified what the other side was doing.

Obama capitulated because he's a spineless moron who would eagerly, and unilaterally eliminate our nuclear arsenal.

 

+1

 

Is this idiot for real? Definately a nominee for most ignorant post of the month. Good grief...................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hypocrisy from the right is all but palpable. They have no shame, no ethics, no morals, no wisdom.... only hypocrisy. And racism.

Shouldn't you be looking for hypocrisy #3??? We love kicking your pansy ass.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The hypocrisy from the right is all but palpable. They have no shame, no ethics, no morals, no wisdom.... only hypocrisy. And racism.

There is a fine example of the ad hominem attack. This is one of the favorite liberal means of debate.

 

Ad Hominem (Argument To The Man):

attacking the person instead of attacking his argument. For example, "Von Daniken's books about ancient astronauts are worthless because he is a convicted forger and embezzler." (Which is true, but that's not why they're worthless.)

Another example is this syllogism, which alludes to Alan Turing's homosexuality:
Turing thinks machines think.

Turing lies with men.

Therefore, machines don't think.

(Note the
in the use of the word "lies".)

A common form is an attack on sincerity. For example, "How can you argue for vegetarianism when you wear leather shoes ?" The
fallacy is related.

A variation (related to
) is to attack a whole class of people. For example, "Evolutionary biology is a sinister tool of the materialistic, atheistic religion of Secular Humanism." Similarly, one notorious net.kook waved away a whole category of evidence by announcing "All the scientists were drunk."

Another variation is attack by innuendo: "Why don't scientists tell us what they really know; are they afraid of public panic ?"

There may be a pretense that the attack isn't happening: "In order to maintain a civil debate, I will not mention my opponent's drinking problem." Or "I don't care if other people say you're [opinionated/boring/overbearing]."

Attacks don't have to be strong or direct. You can merely show disrespect, or cut down his stature by saying that he seems to be sweating a lot, or that he has forgotten what he said last week. Some examples: "I used to think that way when I was your age." "You're new here, aren't you ?" "You weren't breast fed as a child, were you ?" "What drives you to make such a statement ?" "If you'd just listen.." "You seem very emotional." (This last works well if you have been hogging the microphone, so that they have had to yell to be heard.)

Sometimes the attack is on the other person's intelligence. For example, "If you weren't so stupid you would have no problem seeing my point of view." Or, "Even you should understand my next point."

Oddly, the stupidity attack is sometimes reversed. For example, dismissing a comment with "Well, you're just smarter than the rest of us." (In Britain, that might be put as "too clever by half".) This is Dismissal By Differentness. It is related to
and
.

Ad Hominem is not fallacious if the attack goes to the credibility of the argument. For instance, the argument may depend on its presenter's claim that he's an expert. (That is, the Ad Hominem is undermining an
.) Trial judges allow this category of attacks.

 

 

Your lies are becoming more and more outrageous each and every day.

I think you're losing your mind.

Another ad hominem attack. See above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the blatant hypocrisy continues.........

Meaning you have no counter to the facts.

 

Got ya.

 

Yep. Just what can be expected from the right wingnut lunatic fringe. They bathe in hypocrisy, drink it for breakfast, plug their brains into it on talk radio and FAUX Noise, dream about it, smear it all over like cheap cologne.

Republicans = Hypocrites = Republicans.

All because of a Democrat - and a black one at that - in the White House. Pathetic.

He's so butt hurt he's had to resort to name calling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...