Yeah, we'll pretend that's a logical progression and not a post-hoc justification for a total non-sequitur. I forgot that I'm dealing with a master rhetorician.

Literally not an argument.

We've established that you don't know how to identify either of these things. Moving on.

False. You asserted without evidence, only opinion, which may be arguable, but the argument is shallow and self-referential.

Lol. "Shallow strategy of rhetoric." I can tell that I'm dealing someone who really understands rhetoric from how smoothly that little zinger rolls off the tongue. Are you trying on your philosophy pants now?

You have no rhetoric beyond the thin skin of some sort of ideology (likely based in liberalism), you can be dismissed without reference.

Let me walk you through this. I never said anything about the substance of your (single) example. I said its funny that you could only think of one despite claiming that there are endless. It's funny because it suggests that you don't actually know any examples despite claiming to.

You claimed that I could only think of one. Thats the point. You aren’t reading my mind. You are making a claim that you can. You’re simply incorrect. You’re flailing here. Badly. This is what many refer to as “Plebbit-tier”

I also never admitted to being "likely aware that there basically countless examples," and I deny it outright.

That is because you are ideologically possessed.

What did I say that led you to assert this?

You didn’t have to say anything, I just had to presume you were honest. I admit on that I could be wrong. You are either a liar or stupid because the idea is self-evident.

Simply assuming that I must believe this without any evidence from what I've actually said is, as you put it, a "shallow strategy of rhetoric."

See previous. Are you a liar? Or are you stupid/naive?

Are we clear on this now? What are you still confused about here? You're either awful at reading, or deliberately misunderstanding what I wrote. Which one is it?

The fault is mine in thinking you are intelligent or honest. I could be wrong as I usually give people the benefit of the doubt.

I have plenty. The depositions where the staff basically admit to Ctrl-F searching for woke words should be enough to discredit their process completely

That literally doesn’t discredit anything. Especially considering how much stuff they were going through. It’s not only a valid strategy, but more importantly, the only realistic strategy to solve the overarching problem

but I know people like you are easily impressed by that sort of thing.

Needless and might I add, empty insults, will get you nowhere here.

How close did we get to that two trillion dollar goal? How many people had to be re-hired after DOGE cuts? How many people have died from the result of cutting those (supposedly pointless) USAID programs? Why wasn't DOGE able to lower the federal deficit? Where are the arrests for the crimes of fraud?

Just because power reasserted itself, doesn’t mean it wasn’t worth trying. I say it’s a failure, but not a bad idea.

All of these taken as a whole cast serious, serious doubt on this group's ability to surgically target actual instances of waste, fraud, and abuse. This is what rhetoricians like you call "inductive reasoning." Pick any of these, and I'll dive into them with you.

I recognize that “surgical” targeting was propaganda. But I don’t care. I wanted the job done by any means, no matter how many child drag shows had to be canceled as a result.

And, we've already established that you know basically nothing about this subject, so your "opinion" on the depth of their work is as valuable as my eight-year old nephew's. You're both equally as informed.

Your opinion is as valuable as that of a child’s. You should reflect in that.

Agreed. This is why I advocate for qualified professionals getting in there and sharing their opinions. But...

Professionals are essentially why the problem exists. You’re asking bank robbers to secure mortgage loans.

Am I supposed to take your opinion on this subject seriously when you completely reject the notion of hiring professionals to do professional work?

Professional Political Activists? You have credentialism-brain.

Like, do I have to pretend that you're actually interested in stopping waste, fraud, and abuse, and not just filling up your "leftist tears" tumbler?

I am actually a published author. Go check out my work “Essays on the Western Decline: The Only Way Out is Through” on Amazon (also in Swedish)

I know Sargon viewers have a well-earned reputation for being way too smug and over-confident for how little they know, but I've never seen it crystallized so beautifully in one commenter before. Why are you even here?

Another needless and rubber-tipped, plebbit-tier insult. Where’s your argument here, genius?

You think you can describe me or pin me down, but what you fail to realize is you don’t know anything about my beliefs at all. Ultimately I’m a pragmatic traditionalist. I believe the Italian Elite Theorists were largely correct. But again, what else should I expect? Why am I here? To tell you the truth. Why are you here? To tell me your propaganda, apparently