I said (again):
"I am affirming your right to disagree with the President. I am affirming your right to even malign the President."
Then, I said:
"I disagree with your tactic of accusing others of spinning while you seem to be spinning yourself (e.g., using only parts of Novak's statements and parts of the White House Counsel statements).
Do you not understand what reading in context is?
1) I say it is ok to disagee and, then a step further
2) I said that you can even malign him (should you choose to do so)
3) I said you were using a tactic of accusing others of spin while you are spinning yourself, and I cited two instances (below) where you had parsed out statements or mischaracterized something just to fit your opinion.
Here are the two example (within this thread):
Post #52 - One of your parsed statements about the White House statement
(You incorrectly paraphrase the White House Counsel memo...that's spin).
Post #16 - A post with your assertion about "Novak's unsourced assertion"
(Novak's assertion wasn't unsourced. It was a confidential source, not unsourced. Again, you didn't like that you don't know who the source was, so you discredit it...that's spin.)
I objected to your spinning, while accusing others of spinning. I never said that you had maligned the President.