(August 31, 2016 at 6:34 am)Jesster Wrote: "It's wrong because I like my source instead"

Okay  

Go on believing the rumor-mill. We can't stop you.

Well I'd believe the anti-vaxxer rhetoric is closer to her position than her refutation, especially considering that her refutation tries to say she is not anti-vaxxer without repudiatung her earlier comments nor without showing that she disagrees with the anti-vaxxer movement. It's a refutation in the vein of the apologetic non-apology, you know the kind "I'm sorry my comments caused some people to be offended. I hope they can get over it."

So fine, go on believing the non-climb back if you will. The substance of her words give the lie to her subsequent claims.

(August 31, 2016 at 6:52 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:

(August 31, 2016 at 6:34 am)Jesster Wrote: "It's wrong because I like my source instead"

Okay  

Go on believing the rumor-mill. We can't stop you.

Well I'd believe the anti-vaxxer rhetoric is closer to her position than her refutation, especially considering that her refutation tries to say she is not anti-vaxxer without repudiatung her earlier comments nor without showing that she disagrees with the anti-vaxxer movement. It's a refutation in the vein of the apologetic non-apology, you know the kind "I'm sorry my comments caused some people to be offended. I hope they can get over it."

So fine, go on believing the non-climb back if you will. The substance of her words give the lie to her subsequent claims.

She said she's in favor of vaccinations. The rumors started because of a misinterpretation that she later cleared up. You can go on believing whatever you want though. Have fun. I don't really care what you think because you are certainly not convincing.

(August 31, 2016 at 6:56 am)Jesster Wrote:

(August 31, 2016 at 6:52 am)Tazzycorn Wrote: Well I'd believe the anti-vaxxer rhetoric is closer to her position than her refutation, especially considering that her refutation tries to say she is not anti-vaxxer without repudiatung her earlier comments nor without showing that she disagrees with the anti-vaxxer movement. It's a refutation in the vein of the apologetic non-apology, you know the kind "I'm sorry my comments caused some people to be offended. I hope they can get over it."

So fine, go on believing the non-climb back if you will. The substance of her words give the lie to her subsequent claims.

She said she's in favor of vaccinations. The rumors started because of a misinterpretation that she later cleared up. You can go on believing whatever you want though. Have fun. I don't really care what you think because you are certainly not convincing.

Wrong. If you read the two articles yo'd see that the backlash (emphatically not rumours,
rumors don't start from fact) started because she publically said, wrote and tweeted anti-vaxxer propoganda and dog whistle terms, and continued in the same vein even after she said she wasn't anti-vaxxer. If you accept her word, using thecsame criteria you have to accept Trump's word that he's not racist. Otherwise you're engaging in hypocritical doublethink. Now, is Trump a racist or not?

(August 31, 2016 at 7:29 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:

(August 31, 2016 at 6:56 am)Jesster Wrote: She said she's in favor of vaccinations. The rumors started because of a misinterpretation that she later cleared up. You can go on believing whatever you want though. Have fun. I don't really care what you think because you are certainly not convincing.

Wrong. If you read the two articles yo'd see that the backlash (emphatically not rumours,
rumors don't start from fact) started because she publically said, wrote and tweeted anti-vaxxer propoganda and dog whistle terms, and continued in the same vein even after she said she wasn't anti-vaxxer. If you accept her word, using thecsame criteria you have to accept Trump's word that he's not racist. Otherwise you're engaging in hypocritical doublethink. Now, is Trump a racist or not?

Oh look. You've restated your opinion again. I found a good place for that.

(August 31, 2016 at 7:31 am)Jesster Wrote:

(August 31, 2016 at 7:29 am)Tazzycorn Wrote: Wrong. If you read the two articles yo'd see that the backlash (emphatically not rumours,
rumors don't start from fact) started because she publically said, wrote and tweeted anti-vaxxer propoganda and dog whistle terms, and continued in the same vein even after she said she wasn't anti-vaxxer. If you accept her word, using thecsame criteria you have to accept Trump's word that he's not racist. Otherwise you're engaging in hypocritical doublethink. Now, is Trump a racist or not?

Oh look. You've restated your opinion again. I found a good place for that.

So you're not willing to deal with the substantive facts of this matter. That's good to find out, because in future I can put an asterix behind your position denoting that you have been unwilling to change your opinion when contradictory facts emerge. The one thing you can't escape is that a whole corpus of Stein's statements is more persuasive than a single tweet.

(August 31, 2016 at 7:43 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:

(August 31, 2016 at 7:31 am)Jesster Wrote: Oh look. You've restated your opinion again. I found a good place for that.

So you're not willing to deal with the substantive facts of this matter. That's good to find out, because in future I can put an asterix behind your position denoting that you have been unwilling to change your opinion when contradictory facts emerge. The one thing you can't escape is that a whole corpus of Stein's statements is more persuasive than a single tweet.

Facts? Lol. No, I'm just not taking you seriously anymore because your baseless assertions have been debunked... and yet you keep talking anyway. Now I'm just fucking with you to see how much longer you will go on.

Jesster is an absolute savage.

Taz is sounding a bit disorientated from all that spinning.

(August 31, 2016 at 8:42 am)ReptilianPeon Wrote: Taz is sounding a bit disorientated from all that spinning.

So statement of fact is spin now? Oh wait, I forgot that I'm talking to someone whose so blinded by his hatred of America that he'll believe the mouthpiece of a neo-nazi dictator. Well, seeing as none of the three of ye are willing to listen to the facts of the issue, I'll let ye alone with yere delusions

(August 31, 2016 at 10:05 am)Tazzycorn Wrote:

(August 31, 2016 at 8:42 am)ReptilianPeon Wrote: Taz is sounding a bit disorientated from all that spinning.

So statement of fact is spin now? Oh wait, I forgot that I'm talking to someone whose so blinded by his hatred of America that he'll believe the mouthpiece of a neo-nazi dictator. Well, seeing as none of the three of ye are willing to listen to the facts of the issue, I'll let ye alone with yere delusions

kek