When you use fake-quotes like "freedom enhancement techniques" and someone discovers that no three-letter agency or government organization has ever actually said such a thing -- that such a quote isn't exactly grounded in reality (Google only turned up http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/01/31/832543/-President-P..., which was satire), they're inclined to believe "Hey, if they weren't entirely truthful with this aspect of their argument, maybe I shouldn't bother checking out the rest of the stuff they said."

Call it seeing the forest for the strawman; either way, there's enough of an argument to be made by sticking to the facts.

Oh come off it--he's just using quotation marks to emphasize sarcasm.

It is frustrating that quotation marks have come to have two, almost perfectly opposite meanings (the traditional "words someone actually said" and the new "words no one actually said"). I guess the battle against the new usage is lost though.

I think it's interesting - Proust talks about this, an intonation to show detachment.

As he spoke I noticed, what had often struck me before in his conversations with my grandmother’s sisters, that whenever he spoke of serious matters, whenever he used an expression which seemed to imply a definite opinion upon some important subject, he would take care to isolate, to sterilise it by using a special intonation, mechanical and ironic, as though he had put the phrase or word between inverted commas, and was anxious to disclaim any personal responsibility for it; as who should say “the ’hierarchy,’ don’t you know, as silly people call it.

V interesting. I found the reference (please add next time, it's useful) here, and fortunately it was that easy to find: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8g8rAEkl5-UC&lpg=PA92&ots...

Language. Fascinating stuff!

But seriously, "internet" is now a dialect of English, and putting things in "" marks as a substitute for tone is commonly accepted.

People have always used air quotes to show they're quoting someone's exact words, and also when they're being sarcastic and making up a quote. It's just hard to tell when people are being sarcastic in text.

Strictly speaking, "I said everything in these quotation marks."

I think it's much more preferable that having (not!) next to phrases. Using quotation marks arose because there's no quick way to use a backwards question mark which was the traditional symbol.

He has a point though - people look for reasons to not listen, to stop reading and to dismiss arguments that go against what they believe in.

Adding fake 1984-esque names and grandiose claims ("turned almost a whole industry again you") makes you sound like a crazy conspiracy nut.

It also adds little to the conversation.

It's just another form of propaganda. People still believe, for instance, that Sarah Palin actually said she could see Russia from her backyard.

Why are you assuming that the phrase is not a 1337biz creation, because he prefaced it with 'your'? Quotation marks don't always have to equal spoken/written communications.

I see you're a man that sticks to his facts. You definitely brought the real point home.