Nah, Glenn Greenwald is not arguing in good faith and was not for a long time. And I did not needed to "smear campaign" against him to figure that out. All I needed was was to read his twitter feed regularly - as I was. He is good at strong words and insults, but not at good faith discussion at all.
> His beliefs and ideas are clearly left wing and he has remained consistent,
Kinda yes and no, not really. He has some lefty opinions, but that is it.
What did I say that was underhanded or otherwise indicated bad faith? Your direct ad hominem labeling without any context or explanation is the most bad faith thing in this thread.
Cycomanic pointed it out thoroughly enough that I'd only be repeating what they said.
One of your bigger tells however is how you never actually defend your positions. You only attack the others' opinions. You constantly require everyone else to be on the defense while never actually defending your positions yourself.
You're not here to engage in debate, you're here to rant.
I notice you also didn't engage with Cycomanic after he deconstructed your post and called out all of your bad faith tactics. I also pointed out another.
You also like to sneak in hyperbole. You claim I said you were underhanded, when I did no such thing. It's an effort to get me to argue something I never said.
This isn't so much an accusation as just pointing out what you're doing here.
Anyone reading this thread sees that you aren't even discussing the topic, labeling me, and criticizing with vague generalizations, then accusing others of exactly what you are doing, which is bad faith argument. Your response here is not worth further comment.
> His beliefs and ideas are clearly left wing and he has remained consistent,
Kinda yes and no, not really. He has some lefty opinions, but that is it.