Democrats losing all credibility in denial of overwhelming evidence..

[Dill]

(04-04-2024, 12:49 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The funny thing is Dill never actually reads what you write, he interprets it as he wills.  I have said I preferred Trump to Hillary for SCOTUS picks as with Hillary the 2A would be a thing of the past.  I think the 2A is among the most important protections in our Constitution, and it's pretty much unique.  

The other confusion comes from his deliberate obtuseness on the issue of Roe.  While I believe we should have a federal law protecting abortion access, at least up to a point for elective abortions, I thought Roe was poorly decided.  Abortion being a Constitutional right under the 14thA right to privacy was a tenuous link at best.  Oddly enough, Bel entirely agrees with me on this, but somehow the opinion makes me right wing, not him.  I used to have drag out fights on this and the old board regarding same sex marriage.  I've been arguing since I could that marriage has civil benefits, thus excluding two consenting adults from accessing those benefits is blatantly unconstitutional.  Another very right wing position to have.

As much as he complains about labels he seems exceedingly comfortable slapping them on people.  

??? So where is this at any point different from my "willed interpretation" of your position?  

This doesn't correct any "misunderstanding" on my part.  It just repeats what I say your right wing beliefs are and your justifications for them. 
I'd only disagree with oddly false framing comments like "I don't read you" and am "deliberately obtuse" on Roe.
I not only read your posts, I remember them better than you do.    

Sure, somewhere in the deep dark past you used to defend same-sex marriage. Like a (YUCK!) progressive.

But now that you've become one of this forum's LOUDEST and most constant opponents of "the modern left" and "white guilt,"
a defender of nationalism and law and order who expresses his love for the most conservative court in a hundred years, and his anger over
the liberal double standard on Trump, and channels the IDF on the Super thread--surprise surprise--people think you are not "centrist" 
but, yes, a "rightist," by same kind of evidence and logic that, correctly, make me a "leftist." 

It would be silly and inaccurate for me to claim I'm a "centrist"  because I own guns and had "drag out fights" on the old board,
or a right wing poster agrees with me, then go back to criticizing Trump and the GOP and  Right wing politics day in and day out 
from a left-wing angle. Reminding people every now and then that I OWN GUNS TOO! and so must be free of partisan entanglements. 
People would be justified in wondering why the insistent self-misrepresentation, the discomfort with accurate labeling.

So I am comfortable with people "slapping" a left label on me when I practice leftist politics, calling me a "leftist" when I support/defend liberal or actual leftist positions/politicians. Might be different if my criticism were 50/50. But it is not and I don't pretend otherwise.

One SHOULD be comfortable with accurate labeling, but very UNCOMFORTABLE with generating labels ad hoc as rhetorical weapons,
like calling someone a racist or an anti-semite or an ISIS supporter or an ANTIFA supporter as a tactic, depending on the thread topic. 
There is no evidence in this forum that I am "comfortable" using labels that way.