Quote:
Originally posted by scooobiedooobie
uhm...condescending tm? strange that you didn't find jack initially using the term "bizzare bush apologists" condescending.
|
I wasn't suggesting your accusation of "single-minded bush-hating terror apologists" was condescending. If you'll notice, I believe there was a question mark after the word 'condescending' (actually, there's
three, none of them were rhetorical and you still managed to miss them). The question I was asking was whether you considered my intentionally patronising point, of using commas between your adjectives, as 'condescending' (in reference to one of
your recent posts - keep up sweetheart
).
Incidentally though, I don't find your "single-minded bush-hating terror apologists" comment condescending. I find it convenient. See the above post's links regarding the use of the term 'anti-americanism' as a sloppy way of disregarding enquiry. The difference between being a "bizzare bush apologist" and defending Bush's stance and actions to the hilt is relatively slight. In contrast, the difference between being a "single-minded bush-hating terror apologist" and merely critisizing Bush is huge. Difficult to accept, I know... but try your best and you might get an 'A' for effort.
