Who's embarrassed by Joe Biden? - Page 3

The Big Dog · 23rd February 2015, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

It wasn't a tu quoque, I stayed consistent throughout my argument. theprestige implied that getting shot in the face is part of the hobby, it just happens from time to time

. As long as both people are consenting then it shouldn't be a problem. I applied that same line of reasoning to Biden. There's no goal post moving, no tu Quoque
I didn't even know I had "pals" around here, I guess I learned something new today. I don't need any points, I want you to admit that you're wrong in regards to my post, because you are. You're accusing me of being moving the goalposts and committing a fallacy, neither of which am I doing.

So when you're done chuckling feel free to address that.

Sure, you have consistently moved the goal posts and committed a tu quoque fallacy by bringing up Cheney in a thread about Creepy Joe.

Questions?

plague311 · 23rd February 2015, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Sure, you have consistently moved the goal posts and committed a tu quoque fallacy by bringing up Cheney in a thread about Creepy Joe.

Questions?

Yes, do you read the things you are replying too? Have you looked at the words that I have been saying? I didn't bring him up. The point of my post, as well, was to point out that several things had been stated, but theprestige cherry-picked one point, while ignoring the rest of it. Then I specifically addressed the topic of the OP. I haven't moved the goalposts anywhere, they're exactly where they've been this whole time. Outrage by the right wingers about how Biden gets handsy. Noted.

Also, can you provide me with your definition, in your own words, of a tu quoque fallacy?

The Big Dog · 23rd February 2015, 09:41 PM

Originally Posted by Varanid

The Republicans are just upset they didn't get their creepy VP candidate elected.

Originally Posted by plague311

Yes, do you read the things you are replying too? Have you looked at the words that I have been saying? I didn't bring him up. The point of my post, as well, was to point out that several things had been stated, but theprestige cherry-picked one point, while ignoring the rest of it. Then I specifically addressed the topic of the OP. I haven't moved the goalposts anywhere, they're exactly where they've been this whole time. Outrage by the right wingers about how Biden gets handsy. Noted.

Also, can you provide me with your definition, in your own words, of a tu quoque fallacy?

Can I just show you? See the quote above. Can you provide me, in your own words, why that quote is or is not a tu quoque fallacy?

plague311 · 23rd February 2015, 09:45 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Can I just show you? See the quote above. Can you provide me, in your own words, why that quote is or is not a tu quoque fallacy?

That isn't my quote, so why would I care?

The Big Dog · 23rd February 2015, 09:50 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

That isn't my quote, so why would I care?

You don't care. Curious though that you asked, were presented with an OUTSTANDING example of the fallacy, and don't care.

Huh.

plague311 · 23rd February 2015, 09:51 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

You don't care. Curious though that you asked, were presented with an OUTSTANDING example of the fallacy, and don't care.

Huh.

So you accuse me of a fallacy and then support that fallacy with someone else's quote? Perfect, I think I'm about done here. Good day to you.

Jrrarglblarg · 23rd February 2015, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

are we on the same page here???

I was pointing out another glaring example of a tu quoque fallacy....

I KNOW! It was awful!!

Foolmewunz · 23rd February 2015, 11:44 PM

A thread like this would get more traction if the OP wasn't part of the partisan divide. The actual judge of creepy, stupid, idiotic, embarrassing, or any other negative you want to attribute to a pol is whether people on their side of the aisle would come out and say so.

Sort of like how conservatives with bona fide street cred (well, "drawing room cred") have made statements on "the future of the Republican Party".

As a liberal, there's a certain ick factor to Biden's repeated touching to me. But it's about the same as my Mother-in-Law insisting I hold her hand all through a dinner one time. I didn't think anything sexual or sensual of it, I just don't like to be in that sort of contact... with just about anyone who's not my kid or my significant other.

Embarrassing? That'd be a veep who can't spell at a fifth grade level. That'd be the guy who was taking chump change bribes while Veep.
Or the veeps who just took up office space and weren't allowed to do anything... Hamlin, Nixon, Humphrey... (and Biden, pretty much)
Or Hendicks. 20 years after the Civil War, signalling complete capitulation to the Jim Crow block, Cleveland runs with a guy who voted against BOTH the 13th and 14th amendments.

Oh, and loads of presidents have been accused of taking on a veep who was so preposterous that enemies would think twice about removing him from office for fear of handing the job over to someone worse. But usually it's political considerations. (List of Presidents I can recall hearing that about... Kennedy/Johnson, Nixon/Ford, Bush/Quayle, Bush II/Cheney, Obama/Biden.)

LorenzoValla · 24th February 2015, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by Tony Stark

Cheney is actually a villain - he's a war criminal and probably a psychopath.

No, Cheney is a Republican. The US tortures a select group of terrorists and the media is aghast. The message is replayed continuously.

Yet, it's hardly mentioned that Obama's administration has been on a killing spree with drone strikes since just about the day he took office (3 days into it, to be exact).

Quote:

At least 2,464 people have now been killed by US drone strikes outside the country’s declared war zones since President Barack Obama’s inauguration six years ago, the Bureau’s latest monthly report reveals.

Of the total killed since Obama took his oath of office on January 20 2009, at least 314 have been civilians, while the number of confirmed strikes under his administration now stands at 456.

Research by the Bureau also shows there have now been nearly nine times more strikes under Obama in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia than there were under his predecessor, George W Bush.

And the covert Obama strikes, the first of which hit Pakistan just three days after his inauguration, have killed almost six times more people and twice as many civilians than those ordered in the Bush years, the data shows.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/201...-six-years-ago

No, this doesn't mean that Cheney was a good guy. But it shows how easily the media and partisans on the left are willing to keep their head in the sand when the villains are someone they like.

Upchurch · 24th February 2015, 06:01 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Hee hee! I'd suspect that moving the goal posts means changing the subject to "Chaney" but what do I know, huh?

You're trolling again. And you've already been corrected about the "changing the subject", so you can't even claim that this is an honest mistake.

Spindrift · 24th February 2015, 06:39 AM

Originally Posted by sunmaster14

Do we really want somebody's loopy uncle to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? I'll admit that Biden does know a lot about other cultures though. He knows about Indians from going to 7-11, and he knows about Somalis from taking cabs to the train station in Wilmington. And he seems to really be in touch with women's issues. If you know what I mean. Nudge nudge, wink wink.

All that knowledge pretty much overqualifies him for the job. Since when have Republicans ever cared about who was a heartbeat away from the Presidency?

Spindrift · 24th February 2015, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by LorenzoValla

No, Cheney is a Republican. The US tortures a select group of terrorists and the media is aghast. The message is replayed continuously.

Yet, it's hardly mentioned that Obama's administration has been on a killing spree with drone strikes since just about the day he took office (3 days into it, to be exact).

http://www.commondreams.org/news/201...-six-years-ago

No, this doesn't mean that Cheney was a good guy. But it shows how easily the media and partisans on the left are willing to keep their head in the sand when the villains are someone they like.

You mean the media was aghast the US was committing war crimes (torture) and isn't aghast when it isn't (drone strikes)?

kookbreaker · 24th February 2015, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

FTFY.

Oh, does that make it all better? I didn't know that.

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Cripes, my bad. You replied to my post responding to someone else about moving the goalposts and I conflated the two of you.

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Perhaps you should spend more time reading the thread instead of just reacting? It might trim down on the... how did you put it In FM? Politics cess pool trolling?

Originally Posted by Upchurch

By my count, you made three errors in this thread due to poor reading comprehension and it's not even two pages long. Your knee-jerk attempts to "Gotcha!" the other guy has set you up as the very thing you've complained to the mods about this forum.

My way to cut down the trolling is to (1) call you on it and (2) get you to slow down and use critical thinking when posting. Despite the common belief, it is possible in Politics.

Originally Posted by Upchurch

You're trolling again. And you've already been corrected about the "changing the subject", so you can't even claim that this is an honest mistake.

WOOHOOO!!! Three straight posts in a row accusing me of trolling. In bowling they call that a turkey, and you get thirty points for every subsequent strike. So every time you accuse someone of trolling from here on in? 30 points for UpChurch! well done.

I have also learned a lesson. Never acknowledge minor insignificant errors in one's posts, because that is teh "TROLLING!"

Upchurch told me so.

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 07:45 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

So you accuse me of a fallacy and then support that fallacy with someone else's quote? Perfect, I think I'm about done here. Good day to you.

actually you asked me to give you my definition. In reply, I showed you a classic example, you said you didn't care....

I was all like O-kayyyyyy...

and now you seem to have forgotten what you asked me in the first place...

Good day to you as well!

eeyore1954 · 24th February 2015, 07:53 AM

Originally Posted by sunmaster14

Do we really want somebody's loopy uncle to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? I'll admit that Biden does know a lot about other cultures though. He knows about Indians from going to 7-11, and he knows about Somalis from taking cabs to the train station in Wilmington. And he seems to really be in touch with women's issues. If you know what I mean. Nudge nudge, wink wink.

You left out he also knows about articulate clean black men.

I know Bush was known for his gaffs but Biden is right up there with the best of them.

Tony Stark · 24th February 2015, 07:55 AM

Originally Posted by LorenzoValla

No, Cheney is a Republican. The US tortures a select group of terrorists and the media is aghast. The message is replayed continuously.

Cheney is a Republican who had people tortured thus he is a war criminal. It is that simple.

Quote:

Yet, it's hardly mentioned that Obama's administration has been on a killing spree with drone strikes since just about the day he took office (3 days into it, to be exact).

You pretend as if it was a new policy. It wasn't Bush was doing the same thing. Which was why Obama was able to take over so quickly.

Quote:

No, this doesn't mean that Cheney was a good guy. But it shows how easily the media and partisans on the left are willing to keep their head in the sand when the villains are someone they like.

Congress gave the President the power to fight the war on terror and it has never been a war crime to kill enemies in a war.

Torture is without any doubt a war crime.

PS: Bush/Cheney killed way more people than Obama.

eeyore1954 · 24th February 2015, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by Manopolus

Hrmm... after seeing that post, it seems to me that it's a lot of tactile defensive belligerents failing to understand touchy-feely types. The one with the cop in particular sort of shows that it probably isn't some sort of sexual fetish for Biden. It sort of has to do with how you were raised... some people are less hostile towards touching than others, quite frankly. Those same people are also more likely to touch you unexpectedly.

In reality I think I do agree that he is just a touchy kind of person. But you can't deny those are some pretty funny pictures. Although the one with the officer reminds me of a game the guys and girls would play in the back of the school bus in high school. It was called further.

plague311 · 24th February 2015, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

actually you asked me to give you my definition. In reply, I showed you a classic example, you said you didn't care....

I was all like O-kayyyyyy...

and now you seem to have forgotten what you asked me in the first place...

Good day to you as well!

The whole time I've been asking you to explain how I have committed the fallacy, which you have failed to do at every opportunity. When I ask for a description using your own words, you forego that and link to someone else's words. I didn't forget anything. You're trying to play semantics while tap dancing around the fact that you're wrong.

I didn't commit a fallacy, you're attempting to attribute other peoples arguments to me. That's called a strawman. Either admit you're wrong or fix it, or keep denying it. It just makes you look childish and foolish.

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by plague311

I'm not sure, maybe you missed all of the posts above in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney has done, .

Originally Posted by plague311

The whole time I've been asking you to explain how I have committed the fallacy, which you have failed to do at every opportunity. When I ask for a description using your own words, you forego that and link to someone else's words. I didn't forget anything. You're trying to play semantics while tap dancing around the fact that you're wrong.

I didn't commit a fallacy, you're attempting to attribute other peoples arguments to me. That's called a strawman. Either admit you're wrong or fix it, or keep denying it. It just makes you look childish and foolish.

See the post up above? Where you say "maybe you missed all of the posts in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney (sic) has done."

This thread is not about Cheney and even if Cheney did creepy and stupid stuff, that does not at all mean that Biden (the actual subject of the thread) did not do creepy and stupid stuff.

You are guilty of fallacious arguments, in this case what is known as a tu quoque fallacy, otherwise known as appeal to hypocrisy or YOU TOO!

As always, delighted to be of service.

DavidJames · 24th February 2015, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

See the post up above? Where you say "maybe you missed all of the posts in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney (sic) has done."

This thread is not about Cheney and even if Cheney did creepy and stupid stuff, that does not at all mean that Biden (the actual subject of the thread) did not do creepy and stupid stuff.

You are guilty of fallacious arguments, in this case what is known as a tu quoque fallacy, otherwise known as appeal to hypocrisy or YOU TOO!

As always, delighted to be of service.

I fully admit introducing Lord Cheney was fallacious. I just wanted, not to excuse Biden in the process, but to point out the hilarity and absurdity of what Republicans find outrageous. Watching them go on and defend Cheney's "public service" record as VP, was a bonus belly buster.

eeyore1954 · 24th February 2015, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by DavidJames

It's great to see what Conservatives get offended by. Government forcing Christianity? Denying evolution? Denying AGW? Accusing the president of not loving his country?

Nah, that's nothing. What's really important is Biden's hands.

Government forcing Christianity (if it is happening) is something people should get upset about. Denying evolution or AGW is not in my opinion. Unless it would be not allowing schools to teach evolution.
Accusing the president of not loving his country? I don't agree with this opinion but why should someone get upset because a politician voiced this opinion.

Biden's actions are also not worthy of getting upset but he is a good source of humor.

plague311 · 24th February 2015, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

See the post up above? Where you say "maybe you missed all of the posts in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney (sic) has done."

Ah, so despite me explaining this before you just didn't understand it. I guess that happens when you reply to people that are not addressing you at all.

Originally Posted by 16.5

This thread is not about Cheney and even if Cheney did creepy and stupid stuff, that does not at all mean that Biden (the actual subject of the thread) did not do creepy and stupid stuff.

Nor did I imply Biden didn't do creepy stuff, good work on the cherry-picking though. For the thousandth time, I commented on Biden's behavior in my ETA. You couldn't even be bothered to put my whole quote up there. You're taking that statement out of context to create a strawman. As I previously stated, specifically to you, is that theprestige cherry-picked one post in regards to Cheney and compared it to Biden being handsy (again, see the quoted part), but left out ALL of the other stuff stated about Cheney. That made it an invalid comparison and the comparison wasn't mine, it was theprestiges. The rest of that cherry-picked quote:

Quote:

or is it now a requirement that if someone makes a post they have to include everything up to and including that post?

I was commenting that this forum has now become a spot where you have to include everything from the thread in an individual post or else people will try to pick it apart. I wasn't using Cheney's behavior to rationalize Biden's, I stated the comparison between the two was ludicrous.

Originally Posted by 16.5

You are guilty of fallacious arguments, in this case what is known as a tu quoque fallacy, otherwise known as appeal to hypocrisy or YOU TOO!

As always, delighted to be of service.

Good work at strawmanning an argument. Again, anything some members will do to try and get a 'gotcha' moment continues to bog down conversation.

Jrrarglblarg · 24th February 2015, 08:40 AM

The entire reason for post #2 to bring the tu quoque into play. Annoyingly, I had to beat someone with a clue-by-four, but at least someone might have learned a new word.

Political ideologues (from both sides) on the forum are always whanging together fallacious arguments based on nothing more than the Tu Quoque and are seldom called on it. In this case we had an OP about a subjective opionion about the behavior of a politician. My immediate counter, while fallacious, was also intended to introduce objective analysis of Vice Presidents. Uncle Joe is indeed slightly creepy with his habit of "close talking" to women. This is hardly the most embarrassing thing a politician has done just in the last year, much less over the record of the US presidential office, and any objective study of veeps puts this into a much larger set of events. Is it always a tu Quoque to use comparison/contrast in discussion?

Anyway, thanks for playing, 16.5. You volleyed the ball I served just fine.

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 08:42 AM

Ok

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

The entire reason for post #2 to bring the tu quoque into play. Annoyingly, I had to beat someone with a clue-by-four, but at least someone might have learned a new word.

Political ideologues (from both sides) on the forum are always whanging together fallacious arguments based on nothing more than the Tu Quoque and are seldom called on it. In this case we had an OP about a subjective opionion about the behavior of a politician. My immediate counter, while fallacious, was also intended to introduce objective analysis of Vice Presidents. Uncle Joe is indeed slightly creepy with his habit of "close talking" to women. This is hardly the most embarrassing thing a politician has done just in the last year, much less over the record of the US presidential office, and any objective study of veeps puts this into a much larger set of events. Is it always a tu Quoque to use comparison/contrast in discussion?

Anyway, thanks for playing, 16.5. You volleyed the ball I served just fine.

One's comparison becomes anothers thread jack, such as above.

Jrrarglblarg · 24th February 2015, 09:03 AM

So comparison/contrast of the thread subject with other related persons/events/phenomena is a threadjack now? I'll keep that in mind.

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

So comparison/contrast of the thread subject with other related persons/events/phenomena is a threadjack now? I'll keep that in mind.

The rule of "so": this dictates that where a response starts with the word "so" and purports to characterize another's argument, the likelihood that the response contains a strawman approaches 100 percent.

Gentle reader: note that while you insist you are comparing and contrasting, others have done away with that and spend entire posts doing nothing but slamming Bush et al.

By the way, while comparing contrasting can be helpful in explaining an argument, it should not be the argument itself.

TragicMonkey · 24th February 2015, 09:17 AM

From the tone and vitriol I have to assume several posters here have been bad touched by Grabby Joe! I don't suspect anybody's been bad touched by Cheney, though, as his touch instantly kills humans so he can feed on them.

Jrrarglblarg · 24th February 2015, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

The rule of "so": this dictates that where a response starts with the word "so" and purports to characterize another's argument, the likelihood that the response contains a strawman approaches 100 percent.

Gentle reader: note that while you insist you are comparing and contrasting, others have done away with that and spend entire posts doing nothing but slamming Bush et al.

By the way, while comparing contrasting can be helpful in explaining an argument, it should not be the argument itself.

Oh! You know the Rule of So now! Good for you, that's TWO gold stars on your chart. One more and you get to pick a prize from the box under teacher's desk! Well done. I'll try to set up an ad hom for you to volley later.

The Big Dog · 24th February 2015, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

Oh! You know the Rule of So now! Good for you, that's TWO gold stars on your chart. One more and you get to pick a prize from the box under teacher's desk! Well done. I'll try to set up an ad hom for you to volley later.

now you are just being silly! a tu quoque is an ad hom! (although not all ad homs are tu quoque)

Tony Stark · 24th February 2015, 09:57 AM

This person almost became the vice president instead of Biden.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Talk about embarrassing.

Jrrarglblarg · 24th February 2015, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

now you are just being silly! a tu quoque is an ad hom! (although not all ad homs are tu quoque)

People are so cute when they first learn about fallacies.

boooeee · 24th February 2015, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

My memory might be a little fuzy, but I'm pretty sure Biden rubbed her shoulders while Palin read all the newspapers.

Which were painstakingly transcribed onto her hand.

Steve · 24th February 2015, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

From the tone and vitriol I have to assume several posters here have been bad touched by Grabby Joe! I don't suspect anybody's been bad touched by Cheney, though, as his touch instantly kills humans so he can feed on them.

TM - your efforts to bring some sanity and realism back into this thread are appreciated, but futile. I suggest you just sit back and enjoy the hyperbole like I am.

kmortis · 24th February 2015, 12:33 PM

keep to the topic, and the topic is not the other posters. Keep it civil. Don't make me pull this thread over to the side of the forum.

Posted By:kmortis

ehcks · 24th February 2015, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by Spindrift

You mean the media was aghast the US was committing war crimes (torture) and isn't aghast when it isn't (drone strikes)?

Killing people in a war is the essentially all a war is for. Torturing people in a war is horrifically evil and completely ineffective.

Now we can complain about why we're still there at all, but that wouldn't move this conversation anywhere. Especially since we know the Republicans would also still have us over there killing people.

Jrrarglblarg · 24th February 2015, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by kmortis

keep to the topic, and the topic is not the other posters. Keep it civil. Don't make me pull this thread over to the side of the forum.

Posted By:kmortis

Perhaps OP could chime in and clarify what the topic is, then. Are we only allowed to talk about this one incident and nothing else? Then /thread.

Or are we talking about any of various Venn diagram overlap topics such as Vice Presidents, creepy white guys or political misdeeds?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Foolmewunz · 24th February 2015, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon

Perhaps OP could chime in and clarify what the topic is, then. Are we only allowed to talk about this one incident and nothing else? Then /thread.

Or are we talking about any of various Venn diagram overlap topics such as Vice Presidents, creepy white guys or political misdeeds?

Inquiring minds want to know.

I think all that overlap is legitimate thread drift. The 50% posting rate on whether one person's drift was a derail or a tu quoque as much as the other person's has been the problem.

I'd say creepiness in politicos is a fair topic. I listed both Dems and Repubs who were embarrassing in their Veep roles. And as I said above, if we try to make it less partisan, some people can admit that people they might cheer for because of the banner they're running under may just have an "ick factor" that embarrasses you or makes you uncomfortable.

LorenzoValla · 24th February 2015, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Spindrift

You mean the media was aghast the US was committing war crimes (torture) and isn't aghast when it isn't (drone strikes)?

It's not a war crime to kill innocent civilians outside of a declared war zone, repeatedly???

Of course you don't think so, which is why the entire notion of a 'war crime' is a farce.

23rd February 2015, 09:18 PM	#81
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by plague311 It wasn't a tu quoque, I stayed consistent throughout my argument. theprestige implied that getting shot in the face is part of the hobby, it just happens from time to time . As long as both people are consenting then it shouldn't be a problem. I applied that same line of reasoning to Biden. There's no goal post moving, no tu Quoque I didn't even know I had "pals" around here, I guess I learned something new today. I don't need any points, I want you to admit that you're wrong in regards to my post, because you are. You're accusing me of being moving the goalposts and committing a fallacy, neither of which am I doing. So when you're done chuckling feel free to address that. Sure, you have consistently moved the goal posts and committed a tu quoque fallacy by bringing up Cheney in a thread about Creepy Joe. Questions?
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

23rd February 2015, 09:26 PM	#82
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,479	Originally Posted by 16.5 Sure, you have consistently moved the goal posts and committed a tu quoque fallacy by bringing up Cheney in a thread about Creepy Joe. Questions? Yes, do you read the things you are replying too? Have you looked at the words that I have been saying? I didn't bring him up. The point of my post, as well, was to point out that several things had been stated, but theprestige cherry-picked one point, while ignoring the rest of it. Then I specifically addressed the topic of the OP. I haven't moved the goalposts anywhere, they're exactly where they've been this whole time. Outrage by the right wingers about how Biden gets handsy. Noted. Also, can you provide me with your definition, in your own words, of a tu quoque fallacy?
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

23rd February 2015, 09:41 PM	#83
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by Varanid The Republicans are just upset they didn't get their creepy VP candidate elected. Originally Posted by plague311 Yes, do you read the things you are replying too? Have you looked at the words that I have been saying? I didn't bring him up. The point of my post, as well, was to point out that several things had been stated, but theprestige cherry-picked one point, while ignoring the rest of it. Then I specifically addressed the topic of the OP. I haven't moved the goalposts anywhere, they're exactly where they've been this whole time. Outrage by the right wingers about how Biden gets handsy. Noted. Also, can you provide me with your definition, in your own words, of a tu quoque fallacy? Can I just show you? See the quote above. Can you provide me, in your own words, why that quote is or is not a tu quoque fallacy?
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

23rd February 2015, 09:45 PM	#84
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,479	Originally Posted by 16.5 Can I just show you? See the quote above. Can you provide me, in your own words, why that quote is or is not a tu quoque fallacy? That isn't my quote, so why would I care?
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

23rd February 2015, 09:50 PM	#85
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by plague311 That isn't my quote, so why would I care? You don't care. Curious though that you asked, were presented with an OUTSTANDING example of the fallacy, and don't care. Huh.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

23rd February 2015, 09:51 PM	#86
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,479	Originally Posted by 16.5 You don't care. Curious though that you asked, were presented with an OUTSTANDING example of the fallacy, and don't care. Huh. So you accuse me of a fallacy and then support that fallacy with someone else's quote? Perfect, I think I'm about done here. Good day to you.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

23rd February 2015, 10:27 PM	#87
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	Originally Posted by 16.5 are we on the same page here??? I was pointing out another glaring example of a tu quoque fallacy.... I KNOW! It was awful!!
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

23rd February 2015, 11:44 PM	#88
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader TLA Dictator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 41,468	A thread like this would get more traction if the OP wasn't part of the partisan divide. The actual judge of creepy, stupid, idiotic, embarrassing, or any other negative you want to attribute to a pol is whether people on their side of the aisle would come out and say so. Sort of like how conservatives with bona fide street cred (well, "drawing room cred") have made statements on "the future of the Republican Party". As a liberal, there's a certain ick factor to Biden's repeated touching to me. But it's about the same as my Mother-in-Law insisting I hold her hand all through a dinner one time. I didn't think anything sexual or sensual of it, I just don't like to be in that sort of contact... with just about anyone who's not my kid or my significant other. Embarrassing? That'd be a veep who can't spell at a fifth grade level. That'd be the guy who was taking chump change bribes while Veep. Or the veeps who just took up office space and weren't allowed to do anything... Hamlin, Nixon, Humphrey... (and Biden, pretty much) Or Hendicks. 20 years after the Civil War, signalling complete capitulation to the Jim Crow block, Cleveland runs with a guy who voted against BOTH the 13th and 14th amendments. Oh, and loads of presidents have been accused of taking on a veep who was so preposterous that enemies would think twice about removing him from office for fear of handing the job over to someone worse. But usually it's political considerations. (List of Presidents I can recall hearing that about... Kennedy/Johnson, Nixon/Ford, Bush/Quayle, Bush II/Cheney, Obama/Biden.)
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

24th February 2015, 04:05 AM	#89
LorenzoValla Muse Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 968	Originally Posted by Tony Stark Cheney is actually a villain - he's a war criminal and probably a psychopath. No, Cheney is a Republican. The US tortures a select group of terrorists and the media is aghast. The message is replayed continuously. Yet, it's hardly mentioned that Obama's administration has been on a killing spree with drone strikes since just about the day he took office (3 days into it, to be exact). Quote: At least 2,464 people have now been killed by US drone strikes outside the country’s declared war zones since President Barack Obama’s inauguration six years ago, the Bureau’s latest monthly report reveals. Of the total killed since Obama took his oath of office on January 20 2009, at least 314 have been civilians, while the number of confirmed strikes under his administration now stands at 456. Research by the Bureau also shows there have now been nearly nine times more strikes under Obama in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia than there were under his predecessor, George W Bush. And the covert Obama strikes, the first of which hit Pakistan just three days after his inauguration, have killed almost six times more people and twice as many civilians than those ordered in the Bush years, the data shows. http://www.commondreams.org/news/201...-six-years-ago No, this doesn't mean that Cheney was a good guy. But it shows how easily the media and partisans on the left are willing to keep their head in the sand when the villains are someone they like.

24th February 2015, 06:01 AM	#90
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,384	Originally Posted by 16.5 Hee hee! I'd suspect that moving the goal posts means changing the subject to "Chaney" but what do I know, huh? You're trolling again. And you've already been corrected about the "changing the subject", so you can't even claim that this is an honest mistake.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

24th February 2015, 06:39 AM	#91
Spindrift Time Person of the Year, 2006 Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Right here! Posts: 19,246	Originally Posted by sunmaster14 Do we really want somebody's loopy uncle to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? I'll admit that Biden does know a lot about other cultures though. He knows about Indians from going to 7-11, and he knows about Somalis from taking cabs to the train station in Wilmington. And he seems to really be in touch with women's issues. If you know what I mean. Nudge nudge, wink wink. All that knowledge pretty much overqualifies him for the job. Since when have Republicans ever cared about who was a heartbeat away from the Presidency?
	__________________ I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black. Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon

24th February 2015, 06:42 AM	#92
Spindrift Time Person of the Year, 2006 Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Right here! Posts: 19,246	Originally Posted by LorenzoValla No, Cheney is a Republican. The US tortures a select group of terrorists and the media is aghast. The message is replayed continuously. Yet, it's hardly mentioned that Obama's administration has been on a killing spree with drone strikes since just about the day he took office (3 days into it, to be exact). http://www.commondreams.org/news/201...-six-years-ago No, this doesn't mean that Cheney was a good guy. But it shows how easily the media and partisans on the left are willing to keep their head in the sand when the villains are someone they like. You mean the media was aghast the US was committing war crimes (torture) and isn't aghast when it isn't (drone strikes)?
	__________________ I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black. Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon

24th February 2015, 06:49 AM	#93
kookbreaker Evil Fokker Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 13,178	Originally Posted by Ziggurat FTFY. Oh, does that make it all better? I didn't know that.
	__________________ www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun! Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.

24th February 2015, 07:42 AM	#94
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by 16.5 Cripes, my bad. You replied to my post responding to someone else about moving the goalposts and I conflated the two of you. Originally Posted by Upchurch Perhaps you should spend more time reading the thread instead of just reacting? It might trim down on the... how did you put it In FM? Politics cess pool trolling? Originally Posted by Upchurch By my count, you made three errors in this thread due to poor reading comprehension and it's not even two pages long. Your knee-jerk attempts to "Gotcha!" the other guy has set you up as the very thing you've complained to the mods about this forum. My way to cut down the trolling is to (1) call you on it and (2) get you to slow down and use critical thinking when posting. Despite the common belief, it is possible in Politics. Originally Posted by Upchurch You're trolling again. And you've already been corrected about the "changing the subject", so you can't even claim that this is an honest mistake. WOOHOOO!!! Three straight posts in a row accusing me of trolling. In bowling they call that a turkey, and you get thirty points for every subsequent strike. So every time you accuse someone of trolling from here on in? 30 points for UpChurch! well done. I have also learned a lesson. Never acknowledge minor insignificant errors in one's posts, because that is teh "TROLLING!" Upchurch told me so.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 07:45 AM	#95
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by plague311 So you accuse me of a fallacy and then support that fallacy with someone else's quote? Perfect, I think I'm about done here. Good day to you. actually you asked me to give you my definition. In reply, I showed you a classic example, you said you didn't care.... I was all like O-kayyyyyy... and now you seem to have forgotten what you asked me in the first place... Good day to you as well!
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 07:53 AM	#96
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,745	Originally Posted by sunmaster14 Do we really want somebody's loopy uncle to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency? I'll admit that Biden does know a lot about other cultures though. He knows about Indians from going to 7-11, and he knows about Somalis from taking cabs to the train station in Wilmington. And he seems to really be in touch with women's issues. If you know what I mean. Nudge nudge, wink wink. You left out he also knows about articulate clean black men. I know Bush was known for his gaffs but Biden is right up there with the best of them.
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,745

24th February 2015, 07:55 AM	#97
Tony Stark Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 9,626	Originally Posted by LorenzoValla No, Cheney is a Republican. The US tortures a select group of terrorists and the media is aghast. The message is replayed continuously. Cheney is a Republican who had people tortured thus he is a war criminal. It is that simple. Quote: Yet, it's hardly mentioned that Obama's administration has been on a killing spree with drone strikes since just about the day he took office (3 days into it, to be exact). You pretend as if it was a new policy. It wasn't Bush was doing the same thing. Which was why Obama was able to take over so quickly. Quote: No, this doesn't mean that Cheney was a good guy. But it shows how easily the media and partisans on the left are willing to keep their head in the sand when the villains are someone they like. Congress gave the President the power to fight the war on terror and it has never been a war crime to kill enemies in a war. Torture is without any doubt a war crime. PS: Bush/Cheney killed way more people than Obama.
Tony Stark Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 9,626

24th February 2015, 07:57 AM	#98
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,745	Originally Posted by Manopolus Hrmm... after seeing that post, it seems to me that it's a lot of tactile defensive belligerents failing to understand touchy-feely types. The one with the cop in particular sort of shows that it probably isn't some sort of sexual fetish for Biden. It sort of has to do with how you were raised... some people are less hostile towards touching than others, quite frankly. Those same people are also more likely to touch you unexpectedly. In reality I think I do agree that he is just a touchy kind of person. But you can't deny those are some pretty funny pictures. Although the one with the officer reminds me of a game the guys and girls would play in the back of the school bus in high school. It was called further.
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,745

24th February 2015, 08:06 AM	#99
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,479	Originally Posted by 16.5 actually you asked me to give you my definition. In reply, I showed you a classic example, you said you didn't care.... I was all like O-kayyyyyy... and now you seem to have forgotten what you asked me in the first place... Good day to you as well! The whole time I've been asking you to explain how I have committed the fallacy, which you have failed to do at every opportunity. When I ask for a description using your own words, you forego that and link to someone else's words. I didn't forget anything. You're trying to play semantics while tap dancing around the fact that you're wrong. I didn't commit a fallacy, you're attempting to attribute other peoples arguments to me. That's called a strawman. Either admit you're wrong or fix it, or keep denying it. It just makes you look childish and foolish.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

24th February 2015, 08:18 AM	#100
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by plague311 I'm not sure, maybe you missed all of the posts above in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney has done, . Originally Posted by plague311 The whole time I've been asking you to explain how I have committed the fallacy, which you have failed to do at every opportunity. When I ask for a description using your own words, you forego that and link to someone else's words. I didn't forget anything. You're trying to play semantics while tap dancing around the fact that you're wrong. I didn't commit a fallacy, you're attempting to attribute other peoples arguments to me. That's called a strawman. Either admit you're wrong or fix it, or keep denying it. It just makes you look childish and foolish. See the post up above? Where you say "maybe you missed all of the posts in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney (sic) has done." This thread is not about Cheney and even if Cheney did creepy and stupid stuff, that does not at all mean that Biden (the actual subject of the thread) did not do creepy and stupid stuff. You are guilty of fallacious arguments, in this case what is known as a tu quoque fallacy, otherwise known as appeal to hypocrisy or YOU TOO! As always, delighted to be of service.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 08:22 AM	#101
DavidJames Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 10,493	Originally Posted by 16.5 See the post up above? Where you say "maybe you missed all of the posts in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney (sic) has done." This thread is not about Cheney and even if Cheney did creepy and stupid stuff, that does not at all mean that Biden (the actual subject of the thread) did not do creepy and stupid stuff. You are guilty of fallacious arguments, in this case what is known as a tu quoque fallacy, otherwise known as appeal to hypocrisy or YOU TOO! As always, delighted to be of service. I fully admit introducing Lord Cheney was fallacious. I just wanted, not to excuse Biden in the process, but to point out the hilarity and absurdity of what Republicans find outrageous. Watching them go on and defend Cheney's "public service" record as VP, was a bonus belly buster.
	__________________ For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.

24th February 2015, 08:28 AM	#102
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,745	Originally Posted by DavidJames It's great to see what Conservatives get offended by. Government forcing Christianity? Denying evolution? Denying AGW? Accusing the president of not loving his country? Nah, that's nothing. What's really important is Biden's hands. Government forcing Christianity (if it is happening) is something people should get upset about. Denying evolution or AGW is not in my opinion. Unless it would be not allowing schools to teach evolution. Accusing the president of not loving his country? I don't agree with this opinion but why should someone get upset because a politician voiced this opinion. Biden's actions are also not worthy of getting upset but he is a good source of humor.
eeyore1954 Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 6,745

24th February 2015, 08:36 AM	#103
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,479	Originally Posted by 16.5 See the post up above? Where you say "maybe you missed all of the posts in regards to the creepy and stupid stuff Chaney (sic) has done." Ah, so despite me explaining this before you just didn't understand it. I guess that happens when you reply to people that are not addressing you at all. Originally Posted by 16.5 This thread is not about Cheney and even if Cheney did creepy and stupid stuff, that does not at all mean that Biden (the actual subject of the thread) did not do creepy and stupid stuff. Nor did I imply Biden didn't do creepy stuff, good work on the cherry-picking though. For the thousandth time, I commented on Biden's behavior in my ETA. You couldn't even be bothered to put my whole quote up there. You're taking that statement out of context to create a strawman. As I previously stated, specifically to you, is that theprestige cherry-picked one post in regards to Cheney and compared it to Biden being handsy (again, see the quoted part), but left out ALL of the other stuff stated about Cheney. That made it an invalid comparison and the comparison wasn't mine, it was theprestiges. The rest of that cherry-picked quote: Quote: or is it now a requirement that if someone makes a post they have to include everything up to and including that post? I was commenting that this forum has now become a spot where you have to include everything from the thread in an individual post or else people will try to pick it apart. I wasn't using Cheney's behavior to rationalize Biden's, I stated the comparison between the two was ludicrous. Originally Posted by 16.5 You are guilty of fallacious arguments, in this case what is known as a tu quoque fallacy, otherwise known as appeal to hypocrisy or YOU TOO! As always, delighted to be of service. Good work at strawmanning an argument. Again, anything some members will do to try and get a 'gotcha' moment continues to bog down conversation.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

24th February 2015, 08:40 AM	#104
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	The entire reason for post #2 to bring the tu quoque into play. Annoyingly, I had to beat someone with a clue-by-four, but at least someone might have learned a new word. Political ideologues (from both sides) on the forum are always whanging together fallacious arguments based on nothing more than the Tu Quoque and are seldom called on it. In this case we had an OP about a subjective opionion about the behavior of a politician. My immediate counter, while fallacious, was also intended to introduce objective analysis of Vice Presidents. Uncle Joe is indeed slightly creepy with his habit of "close talking" to women. This is hardly the most embarrassing thing a politician has done just in the last year, much less over the record of the US presidential office, and any objective study of veeps puts this into a much larger set of events. Is it always a tu Quoque to use comparison/contrast in discussion? Anyway, thanks for playing, 16.5. You volleyed the ball I served just fine.
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

24th February 2015, 08:42 AM	#105
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Ok
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 08:47 AM	#106
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon The entire reason for post #2 to bring the tu quoque into play. Annoyingly, I had to beat someone with a clue-by-four, but at least someone might have learned a new word. Political ideologues (from both sides) on the forum are always whanging together fallacious arguments based on nothing more than the Tu Quoque and are seldom called on it. In this case we had an OP about a subjective opionion about the behavior of a politician. My immediate counter, while fallacious, was also intended to introduce objective analysis of Vice Presidents. Uncle Joe is indeed slightly creepy with his habit of "close talking" to women. This is hardly the most embarrassing thing a politician has done just in the last year, much less over the record of the US presidential office, and any objective study of veeps puts this into a much larger set of events. Is it always a tu Quoque to use comparison/contrast in discussion? Anyway, thanks for playing, 16.5. You volleyed the ball I served just fine. One's comparison becomes anothers thread jack, such as above.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 09:03 AM	#107
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	So comparison/contrast of the thread subject with other related persons/events/phenomena is a threadjack now? I'll keep that in mind.
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

24th February 2015, 09:11 AM	#108
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon So comparison/contrast of the thread subject with other related persons/events/phenomena is a threadjack now? I'll keep that in mind. The rule of "so": this dictates that where a response starts with the word "so" and purports to characterize another's argument, the likelihood that the response contains a strawman approaches 100 percent. Gentle reader: note that while you insist you are comparing and contrasting, others have done away with that and spend entire posts doing nothing but slamming Bush et al. By the way, while comparing contrasting can be helpful in explaining an argument, it should not be the argument itself.
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 09:17 AM	#109
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 59,518	From the tone and vitriol I have to assume several posters here have been bad touched by Grabby Joe! I don't suspect anybody's been bad touched by Cheney, though, as his touch instantly kills humans so he can feed on them.
	__________________ You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.

24th February 2015, 09:40 AM	#110
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	Originally Posted by 16.5 The rule of "so": this dictates that where a response starts with the word "so" and purports to characterize another's argument, the likelihood that the response contains a strawman approaches 100 percent. Gentle reader: note that while you insist you are comparing and contrasting, others have done away with that and spend entire posts doing nothing but slamming Bush et al. By the way, while comparing contrasting can be helpful in explaining an argument, it should not be the argument itself. Oh! You know the Rule of So now! Good for you, that's TWO gold stars on your chart. One more and you get to pick a prize from the box under teacher's desk! Well done. I'll try to set up an ad hom for you to volley later.
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

24th February 2015, 09:43 AM	#111
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742	Originally Posted by ApolloGnomon Oh! You know the Rule of So now! Good for you, that's TWO gold stars on your chart. One more and you get to pick a prize from the box under teacher's desk! Well done. I'll try to set up an ad hom for you to volley later. now you are just being silly! a tu quoque is an ad hom! (although not all ad homs are tu quoque)
The Big Dog Guest Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 29,742

24th February 2015, 10:12 AM	#113
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	Originally Posted by 16.5 now you are just being silly! a tu quoque is an ad hom! (although not all ad homs are tu quoque) People are so cute when they first learn about fallacies.
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

24th February 2015, 10:23 AM	#114
boooeee Dart Fener Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,662	Originally Posted by Upchurch My memory might be a little fuzy, but I'm pretty sure Biden rubbed her shoulders while Palin read all the newspapers. Which were painstakingly transcribed onto her hand.
boooeee Dart Fener Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,662

24th February 2015, 11:22 AM	#115
Steve Philosopher Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney Nova Scotia Posts: 8,428	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey From the tone and vitriol I have to assume several posters here have been bad touched by Grabby Joe! I don't suspect anybody's been bad touched by Cheney, though, as his touch instantly kills humans so he can feed on them. TM - your efforts to bring some sanity and realism back into this thread are appreciated, but futile. I suggest you just sit back and enjoy the hyperbole like I am.
	__________________ Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"

24th February 2015, 01:13 PM	#117
ehcks Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,302	Originally Posted by Spindrift You mean the media was aghast the US was committing war crimes (torture) and isn't aghast when it isn't (drone strikes)? Killing people in a war is the essentially all a war is for. Torturing people in a war is horrifically evil and completely ineffective. Now we can complain about why we're still there at all, but that wouldn't move this conversation anywhere. Especially since we know the Republicans would also still have us over there killing people.
ehcks Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,302	__________________ Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor