No, I was trying to see if the attempt to distinguish between Biden's energy policies and their potential impacts on the economy was genuine, or just an attempt to dodge addressing the point of my question.
If I understand, yep, there's a reason it is called "spin" rather than "factual reporting".
Here was my response:
Obviously you haven't been following along. Don;'t expect anyone here to provide you with crib notes.....feel free to sound ignorant about the discussion though.
Most recently, in post 394, after post after post wasn't able to figure out that the title of this very thread proves my point. I'm not sure how much more plainly I can explain it - can you be more specific in which part you're having trouble understanding?
No, I just refuse to chase my tail.......Don't tell me you believe him?....LOLOLI love how you duck out of a conversation when you get shook up.
Makes as much sense as any of the other attempts to reconcile the conflicting right wing messaging about why a guy who can't even find his car keys is now also implementing his decades long sinister plan to disrupt the economies of every nation in the world.
This opinion doesn't seem to be shared by others who have read my post. Perhaps there's confusion between the straightforward answer I gave versus the answer needed to salvage the right wing narrative. Both are answers, of course, but maybe there's an attempt to pretend that factual statements which don't go along with right wing spin aren't legitimate or something? More of that "alternative facts" thing, perhaps.
