Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   
fucking neocon propaganda...but what about israel?

Home // Israel Corner



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Author Message
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
Well, I think it is awesome that you think Bush should be impeached. Shocked

Whereas I think it's a shame that you have the ability to make some fairly rational arguments, but instead you choose to waste time with silly empty hyperbole and ridiculous statements. Nothing I wrote supports the notion that I think Bush or anyone should be impeached.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Xerxes wrote:
Well, I think it is awesome that you think Bush should be impeached. Shocked

Whereas I think it's a shame that you have the ability to make some fairly rational arguments, but instead you choose to waste time with silly empty hyperbole and ridiculous statements. Nothing I wrote supports the notion that I think Bush or anyone should be impeached.


I am sorry, I misunderstood what you meant.

I was kidding! You sure are sensitive about your Bush, aren't you?
Back to top
Raibeart
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 492

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Raibeart wrote:
You will have to explain which is the "poorly constructed straw man" you're referring to in order for me to understand the relevance of this.

(Sigh...)

Okay everyone, class is in session. Pay attention, because I'm only going to explain this once. Here's Raibeart's most recent straw man creation:

Raibeart wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:
First, the history of our meddling in foreign affairs is rife with examples of such unintended consequences. If you expect me to defend it, you will be disappointed. As for their being freedom fighters in one instance and terrorists in another, I believe that is a function of their behavior in each circumstance.

In other words, when it suits the US they are "mujahideen freedom fighters", but when the EXACT same group joins their co-religionists in Iraq using the EXACT same tactics, they are now called by the US "terrorists". Thanks for clearing that up for me TrespasserW.

This is a clear cut example of a straw man fallacy (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html). Rather than respond to what I actually wrote, you pretend to regurgitate it back to me, only you offer a completely new argument that is (A) not mine and (B) designed (by you) to be obviously flawed and easy for you to knock down. You then challenge me to stand by your fabricated argument, pretending it was mine.

Any questions? Cool


I already acknowledged that YOU had given YOUR definition of "terrorist/terrorism". I, on the other hand, was merely pointing out the HYPOCRISY of the US Govt's (and their supporters) definition of "terrorist/terrorism" when it suits their puposes. I have never attributed the US definition to you TrespasserW.
Back to top
Raibeart
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 492

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh look, these "terrorists" are now being described as "rebels".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wor.....586283.stm
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 3:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
You sure are sensitive about your Bush, aren't you?

I must admit I get annoyed by the number of people who assume that if I question their statements against someone (Bush, for example) it means I'm sticking up for him or something. The only thing I'm trying to do in any of these discussions is to share my opinion while advancing understanding of the issue, rationality, logic, and civility. (Although I'm willing to let that last go when it suits me.) Cool
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Xerxes wrote:
You sure are sensitive about your Bush, aren't you?

I must admit I get annoyed by the number of people who assume that if I question their statements against someone (Bush, for example) it means I'm sticking up for him or something. The only thing I'm trying to do in any of these discussions is to share my opinion while advancing understanding of the issue, rationality, logic, and civility. (Although I'm willing to let that last go when it suits me.) Cool


Well, if it is any consolation, Kucinich is introducing legislation for impeachment sometime this week. Keep your fingers crossed!!!
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rolling Eyes Whom is he seeking to impeach, and what are the specific charges?

(This should be a hoot! Maybe you want to create a new topic for this?)
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Rolling Eyes Whom is he seeking to impeach, and what are the specific charges?

(This should be a hoot! Maybe you want to create a new topic for this?)


Dunno, just heard it yesterday...Something to do with lying about pre-war intelligence, or something?
http://kucinich.us/node/3696
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 3:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If you don't know anything about the facts, why are you suggesting we keep our fingers crossed? Seems to me you hate Bush more than you care about the system. (Whereas I put the system above them all, because in the end only the system, the constitution properly adhered to, can save us from them.)
Besides, don't you even care whether Kucinich has a valid charge? Shouldn't you know before you champion what he's doing? Assuming he does, bully for him; if there's a valid charge of impeachment to be made against any politician, I all for seeing the charges brought and seeing them stick. But if Kucinich is just spitting into the fan, as I suspect he is, won't bringing empty charges against Bush just make the Democrats look weak and impotent? That would seem to serve Bush more than the Democrats, don't you think?
Back to top
Raibeart
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 492

PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
If you don't know anything about the facts, why are you suggesting we keep our fingers crossed? Seems to me you hate Bush more than you care about the system. (Whereas I put the system above them all, because in the end only the system, the constitution properly adhered to, can save us from them.)
Besides, don't you even care whether Kucinich has a valid charge? Shouldn't you know before you champion what he's doing? Assuming he does, bully for him; if there's a valid charge of impeachment to be made against any politician, I all for seeing the charges brought and seeing them stick. But if Kucinich is just spitting into the fan, as I suspect he is, won't bringing empty charges against Bush just make the Democrats look weak and impotent? That would seem to serve Bush more than the Democrats, don't you think?


PNAC.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
If you don't know anything about the facts, why are you suggesting we keep our fingers crossed? Seems to me you hate Bush more than you care about the system. (Whereas I put the system above them all, because in the end only the system, the constitution properly adhered to, can save us from them.)
Besides, don't you even care whether Kucinich has a valid charge? Shouldn't you know before you champion what he's doing? Assuming he does, bully for him; if there's a valid charge of impeachment to be made against any politician, I all for seeing the charges brought and seeing them stick. But if Kucinich is just spitting into the fan, as I suspect he is, won't bringing empty charges against Bush just make the Democrats look weak and impotent? That would seem to serve Bush more than the Democrats, don't you think?


It will get the ball rolling, or at least cause a ruckus. We need a good ruckus. I don't think that he had a co-sponsor as of yesterday. But that could change at any minute. So they (Bush/Cheney) might want to tread lightly. Or co-sponsors might start crawling out of the woodwork.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:
If you don't know anything about the facts, why are you suggesting we keep our fingers crossed? Seems to me you hate Bush more than you care about the system. (Whereas I put the system above them all, because in the end only the system, the constitution properly adhered to, can save us from them.)
Besides, don't you even care whether Kucinich has a valid charge? Shouldn't you know before you champion what he's doing? Assuming he does, bully for him; if there's a valid charge of impeachment to be made against any politician, I all for seeing the charges brought and seeing them stick. But if Kucinich is just spitting into the fan, as I suspect he is, won't bringing empty charges against Bush just make the Democrats look weak and impotent? That would seem to serve Bush more than the Democrats, don't you think?

It will get the ball rolling, or at least cause a ruckus. We need a good ruckus. I don't think that he had a co-sponsor as of yesterday. But that could change at any minute. So they (Bush/Cheney) might want to tread lightly. Or co-sponsors might start crawling out of the woodwork.

Tread lightly regarding what? You don't even know what charges Kucinich thinks he can make. Seriously, did you read my reply? Do you disagree that bringing bullshit impeachment charges against Bush does nothing to harm Bush and everything to harm the Democrats? If so, explain your disagreement. Otherwise, I'd seriously rethink your premature glee.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 2:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Do you disagree that bringing bullshit impeachment charges against Bush does nothing to harm Bush and everything to harm the Democrats? If so, explain your disagreement. Otherwise, I'd seriously rethink your premature glee.


No, I agree that it would do nothing but harm to the Dems if they brought bullshit charges against them. I am not gleeful one iota. Just anxious, I guess.
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
I agree that it would do nothing but harm to the Dems if they brought bullshit charges against them.

Quote:
"I do not stand alone," Dennis Kucinich said as he stood, alone, in front of a cluster of microphones yesterday evening.

The Ohio congressman, a Democratic presidential candidate, was holding a news conference outside the Capitol to announce that he had just filed articles of impeachment against Vice President Cheney. But subsequent questioning quickly revealed that Kucinich had not yet persuaded any of his 434 colleagues to be a cosponsor, that he had not even discussed the matter with House Democratic leaders, and that he had not raised the subject with the Judiciary Committee.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....02341.html

If you were thinking of taking this impeachment seriously, it might help to know that no one aside from Kucinich himself is. (That ought to tell you something, unless you think every other Democrat in Washington is a fan of Cheney.)
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1564
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Xerxes wrote:
I agree that it would do nothing but harm to the Dems if they brought bullshit charges against them.

Quote:
"I do not stand alone," Dennis Kucinich said as he stood, alone, in front of a cluster of microphones yesterday evening.

The Ohio congressman, a Democratic presidential candidate, was holding a news conference outside the Capitol to announce that he had just filed articles of impeachment against Vice President Cheney. But subsequent questioning quickly revealed that Kucinich had not yet persuaded any of his 434 colleagues to be a cosponsor, that he had not even discussed the matter with House Democratic leaders, and that he had not raised the subject with the Judiciary Committee.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....02341.html

If you were thinking of taking this impeachment seriously, it might help to know that no one aside from Kucinich himself is. (That ought to tell you something, unless you think every other Democrat in Washington is a fan of Cheney.)


Well, just keep your fingers crossed. Maybe there will be some justice in the world.
Back to top


Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Israel Corner All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 8 of 9

 

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics
Politics blogs Politics blogs Article Directory Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory Top Blog Sites