this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2025
720 points (95.0% liked)

Greentext

7467 readers
787 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

can only get 25 hours because obongocare

That's not exactly a criticism and more of a dog whistle, as the person you replied to said.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Obongo

Congratulations on not hearing the whistle, but this is not the "other side" discourse you were looking for.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 1 points 20 hours ago

Sounds like he has plenty of free time, and a car, so get a second job. That's what MAGA wants him to do.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I know what obongo means, don't know what "other side" discourse you think I'm looking for, but you seem to have made up your mind about what kind of strawman I am, so have fun I guess.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I assumed you were acting like this was a fair and factual criticism of Obamacare, since you responded to someone calling it bullshit by defending fair and factual criticism.
Since you also said you thought Obamacare was a net positive, I assumed you were arguing that we should be open to listening to criticism of things we approve of, or listening to the "other side of the conversation", and just misunderstood what you were defending.

I really don't see this as a negative strawman, but I'm quite curious to know what you thought I was arguing against.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I really don’t see this as a negative strawman

All strawmen are negative, if a person (or their argument) needs to be caricatured to be attacked, it shouldn't be attacked. If it can be attacked and you're just caricaturing for fun, then you're diluting the argument and shouldn't.

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 minutes ago

Do you think that my description is negative, a caricature, or a strawman now that I've said what I was responding to? How was I misrepresenting your opinion by, I thought, assuming positive intent?