Eli Lake Owns The Antisemites

[boedicca]

I am totally <3ing Eli Lake.



And this one is so awesome:

 

[boedicca]

I bet the caller posts here.

Daily Beast 8217 s Eli Lake to C-SPAN Caller 8216 I Wish You Luck with Your Mental Illness 8217 Mediaite

 

[Rikurzhen]

That wasn't actually antisemitism. We don't know if they were antisemites. They're anti-Israel. There's a difference.

The first guy had to ruin what started out as a good point. We're borrowing a trillion per year, we can't afford our government, people are jobless, so what exactly is our interest in Syria? That would have been a fine question, but then he has to drag Israel into the picture. Any panelist or guest with a 1/16th of a brain could spot the gift being handed him - focus the response on the Israel aspect and ignore the rest and that's exactly what Lake did.

 

[SAYIT]

That wasn't actually antisemitism. We don't know if they were antisemites. They're anti-Israel. There's a difference.

The first guy had to ruin what started out as a good point. We're borrowing a trillion per year, we can't afford our government, people are jobless, so what exactly is our interest in Syria? That would have been a fine question, but then he has to drag Israel into the picture. Any panelist or guest with a 1/16th of a brain could spot the gift being handed him - focus the response on the Israel aspect and ignore the rest and that's exactly what Lake did.

They both made the same point ... things aren't great here and it's all Israel's fault. The first caller alluded to a US gov't (neocon) conspiracy to subvert American interests to benefit Israel and the second using a different canard to make the same claim. Many if not most anti-Israel sentiment is steeped in anti-Semitism and it's embarrassingly obvious.

 

[boedicca]

That wasn't actually antisemitism. We don't know if they were antisemites. They're anti-Israel. There's a difference.

The first guy had to ruin what started out as a good point. We're borrowing a trillion per year, we can't afford our government, people are jobless, so what exactly is our interest in Syria? That would have been a fine question, but then he has to drag Israel into the picture. Any panelist or guest with a 1/16th of a brain could spot the gift being handed him - focus the response on the Israel aspect and ignore the rest and that's exactly what Lake did.

I disagree about Israel not being about antisemitism. It's a form of it.

 

[Beelzebub]

I disagree about Israel not being about antisemitism. It's a form of it.

Do you? You disagree do you? Well whoopedy doo!
So you are entirely uneducated or just personally dishonest.
Thanks for sharing.

Being anti-Israel, more accurately anti-Zionist-Israel is about as anti-Semitic as being anti-Nazi Germany is 'the same' as being anti-European.

You dolt.

 

[Kondor3]

I disagree about Israel not being about antisemitism. It's a form of it.

Do you? You disagree do you? Well whoopedy doo!
So you are entirely uneducated or just personally dishonest.
Thanks for sharing.

Being anti-Israel, more accurately anti-Zionist-Israel is about as anti-Semitic as being anti-Nazi Germany is 'the same' as being anti-European.

You dolt.

So, you disagree with that person who disagreed with you?

Well, whoopedy doo!

You dolt.

 

[boedicca]

I disagree about Israel not being about antisemitism. It's a form of it.

Do you? You disagree do you? Well whoopedy doo!
So you are entirely uneducated or just personally dishonest.
Thanks for sharing.

Being anti-Israel, more accurately anti-Zionist-Israel is about as anti-Semitic as being anti-Nazi Germany is 'the same' as being anti-European.

You dolt.

^^^ obviously harbors antisemitic sentiments ^^^

 

[Beelzebub]

I disagree about Israel not being about antisemitism. It's a form of it.

Do you? You disagree do you? Well whoopedy doo!
So you are entirely uneducated or just personally dishonest.
Thanks for sharing.

Being anti-Israel, more accurately anti-Zionist-Israel is about as anti-Semitic as being anti-Nazi Germany is 'the same' as being anti-European.

You dolt.

So, you disagree with that person who disagreed with you?

Well, whoopedy doo!

You dolt.

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Why, thank you, kind sir.

 

[Grendelyn]

I am totally <3ing Eli Lake.



And this one is so awesome:

Dear boedicca ~ Only if you are under the false-assumption that an ad hominem attack carried the ability to 'own' someone, would it be possible to believe that Mr. Lake owned either of the callers. ~ Susan
PS The one caller stating that America has "no dog in this fight," was most certainly correct and I commend him for saying it . . . with great dismay, I noted that Mr. Lake failed to give a response to it.

Mod edit: Grendelyn, please do not post your comments in red. That is the color that moderators use in the forum when leaving moderation messages, such as this. It can confuse other members. Thanks - Taz

 

[boedicca]

I am totally <3ing Eli Lake.



And this one is so awesome:

Dear boedicca ~ Only if you are under the false-assumption that an ad hominem attack carried the ability to 'own' someone, would it be possible to believe that Mr. Lake owned either of the callers. ~ Susan
PS The one caller stating that America has "no dog in this fight," was most certainly correct and I commend him for saying it . . . with great dismay, I noted that Mr. Lake failed to give a response to it.

Whatever. Posting in large red bold letters doesn't make your post convincing.

But thank you for sharing.

 

[Grendelyn]

I am totally <3ing Eli Lake.



And this one is so awesome:

Dear boedicca ~ Only if you are under the false-assumption that an ad hominem attack carried the ability to 'own' someone, would it be possible to believe that Mr. Lake owned either of the callers. ~ Susan
PS The one caller stating that America has "no dog in this fight," was most certainly correct and I commend him for saying it . . . with great dismay, I noted that Mr. Lake failed to give a response to it.

Whatever. Posting in large red bold letters doesn't make your post convincing.

But thank you for sharing.

Dear boedicca ~ You're more than welcome. ~ Susan
PS I'm still searching for what I believe to be best for structuring my text on this board and therefor appreciate any feedback about it, even if it's negative like yours . If I may ask, is this smaller font, still in bold red, perhaps a bit more convincing?

 

[boedicca]

I am totally <3ing Eli Lake.



And this one is so awesome:

Dear boedicca ~ Only if you are under the false-assumption that an ad hominem attack carried the ability to 'own' someone, would it be possible to believe that Mr. Lake owned either of the callers. ~ Susan
PS The one caller stating that America has "no dog in this fight," was most certainly correct and I commend him for saying it . . . with great dismay, I noted that Mr. Lake failed to give a response to it.

Whatever. Posting in large red bold letters doesn't make your post convincing.

But thank you for sharing.

Dear boedicca ~ You're more than welcome. ~ Susan
PS I'm still searching for what I believe to be best for structuring my text on this board and therefor appreciate any feedback about it, even if it's negative like yours . If I may ask, is this smaller font, still in bold red, perhaps a bit more convincing?

No. It's quite annoying.

 

[Beelzebub]

I am totally <3ing Eli Lake.



And this one is so awesome:

Dear boedicca ~ Only if you are under the false-assumption that an ad hominem attack carried the ability to 'own' someone, would it be possible to believe that Mr. Lake owned either of the callers. ~ Susan
PS The one caller stating that America has "no dog in this fight," was most certainly correct and I commend him for saying it . . . with great dismay, I noted that Mr. Lake failed to give a response to it.

Whatever. Posting in large red bold letters doesn't make your post convincing.

But thank you for sharing.

Dear boedicca ~ You're more than welcome. ~ Susan
PS I'm still searching for what I believe to be best for structuring my text on this board and therefor appreciate any feedback about it, even if it's negative like yours . If I may ask, is this smaller font, still in bold red, perhaps a bit more convincing?

Yep.

This one is clear, and easy focus stuff. Doesn't look shouty. And it annoys Bootlicker, so all good.

 

[Challenger]

I thought posting in red was reserved for the Moderators, but hey, whatever.

Just out of curiosity who is this Eli Lake individual and why should I even care what he thinks or does? From what I've seen here, his standard gambit seems to be to accuse those who disagree with him of insanity or social inadequacy while failing to make any sort of counter argument. But to be fair, these were only snippets of conversations.

 

[boedicca]

I thought posting in red was reserved for the Moderators, but hey, whatever.

Just out of curiosity who is this Eli Lake individual and why should I even care what he thinks or does? From what I've seen here, his standard gambit seems to be to accuse those who disagree with him of insanity or social inadequacy while failing to make any sort of counter argument. But to be fair, these were only snippets of conversations.

Red is reserved for Moderators...and apparently for people who prefer to post annoying font and color choices instead of focusing on intelligible content.

 

[teddyearp]

I thought posting in red was reserved for the Moderators, but hey, whatever.

Same here, but I guess it's not an actual rule. I did a double check to make sure Grendelyn wasn't made a mod. She wasn't, thank god. We will see about the other.

 

[teddyearp]

<snip>people who prefer to post annoying font and color choices instead of focusing on intelligible content.

Yeah, I totally agree with this. On the many boards I visit, I always find it amusing (self grandstanding) when people have to change the text style, font and color to make their post; and what follows is therefore usually useless.

 

[Grendelyn]

I thought posting in red was reserved for the Moderators, but hey, whatever.

Same here, but I guess it's not an actual rule. I did a double check to make sure Grendelyn wasn't made a mod. She wasn't, thank god. We will see about the other.

Do tell . . . perhaps you can answer the question as to why this board has a 'Text Color' icon for use if it is not to be used? ~ Susan

 

[teddyearp]

Mod edit: Grendelyn, please do not post your comments in red. That is the color that moderators use in the forum when leaving moderation messages, such as this. It can confuse other members. Thanks - Taz

Do tell . . . perhaps you can answer the question as to why this board has a 'Text Color' icon for use if it is not to be used? ~ Susan

I am just going to leave this for you to read; since you obviously cannot read. I have no other comment on this line of this thread. It has already been addressed.