Fox News makes me laugh

[6thGen]

One isolated incident reported by a savvy sowaler doesn't prove anything.

Your narrow mind is ignoring the fact that this country is part of a global economy as well, so when you come off your micro headed thinking, chew on this article for a while, then go spend some time on Wall Street with some traders.

While you're here in New York, I'll prepare you a 3 headed Hudson River Trout, and you can eat it while admiring the view of West Point whose students are getting ready to graduate, while mourning the largest share of casualties than at any time in recent military history.

One isolated incident proves everything. If a backhoe on the bay in a very sparsely populated area in a small town can be stopped in a matter of hours, massive dumping over many years cannot be detected or stopped? What kind of reasoning is that?

And who is narrow minded here? You've completely changed the subject. I understand that we are part of a global economy, but that has nothing to do with Indians eating money. Nor does the war. Try, just try to stay on topic.

Here, try this - what is your answer for stopping companies from dumping, stopping trees from being cut down, etc? You've attacked my position with red herrings that are insults to red herrings. "Oh yea, the Cree Indian statement lacks an understanding of basic economics - WILL WHAT ABOUT THE BOYS AT WEST POINT??? HUH???" Are we even having the same conversation here? What is your solution to "greed"? I am waiting with baited breath.

 

[6thGen]

Also, I haven't yet the time to read the article, but scanning it, how many of those countries pictured have open, liberal economies? I know, I just look at the pictures, but I'm kind of tied up right now. Why don't you give me a list of countries with centrally controlled and regulated economies vs. the countries with free economies. I'm guessing your article will prove my point.

 

[rancid]

One isolated incident proves everything. If a backhoe on the bay in a very sparsely populated area in a small town can be stopped in a matter of hours, massive dumping over many years cannot be detected or stopped? What kind of reasoning is that?

And who is narrow minded here? You've completely changed the subject. I understand that we are part of a global economy, but that has nothing to do with Indians eating money. Nor does the war. Try, just try to stay on topic.

Here, try this - what is your answer for stopping companies from dumping, stopping trees from being cut down, etc? You've attacked my position with red herrings that are insults to red herrings. "Oh yea, the Cree Indian statement lacks an understanding of basic economics - WILL WHAT ABOUT THE BOYS AT WEST POINT??? HUH???" Are we even having the same conversation here? What is your solution to "greed"? I am waiting with baited breath.

Can you explain the "red herring and "straw man" references you use frequently. I get the basic point but am unfamiliar with their origins.

 

[6thGen]

Can you explain the "red herring and "straw man" references you use frequently. I get the basic point but am unfamiliar with their origins.

Sure. Basically a straw man is distorting someone's argument to something you can easily knock down. An example would be along the lines of:

Person A: "I believe that invading Iraq and forcing regime change is vital to national security."
Person B: "Why? Saddam Hussein didn't fly the planes into the building."

A red herring is completely changing the subject, for example the Chewbacca defense on South Park.

Person A: "I believe that government meddling is harmful to economic growth."
Person B: "I really like chocolate pudding, and purchasing JELLO products is good for the economy."

 

[30gAy]

While your sexual orientation is obvious, I would appreciate a little less vulgarity in the open forum, please...Red

Dear Red,

Until you can prove minors are viewing SoWal?s political forum and that a moment of levity wasn?t badly needed here, a little less prudishness would be appreciated.

Thanks, 30-gAy

 

[30gAy]

Can you explain the "red herring and "straw man" references you use frequently. I get the basic point but am unfamiliar with their origins.

Rancid, let me see if I can help clarify with a few specific examples.

A good example of a Straw Man argument is 6thGen?s post #12, ?As for the Falwell death announcement, he is, in effect, the founder of the Religious Right. I assume if anyone was upset about the alert, then they'd also be upset if an alert popped up for, say, Rand, Marx or FDR.?, since clearly Marx or FDR are much larger historical figures.


A good example of a Red Herring would be 6thGen?s response in Post #35, to kathydwells quote regarding greed:

?Maybe if American Indians looked to solutions other than the way of the buffalo, they'd get a handle on their people's problem of alcoholism.?, Since alcoholism was never part of the original discussion.


But my favorite flawed debating tactic is Tunnel Vision Arguments, you know like ?All arabs are violent and war-like, because every war in the mid-east has involved arabs?.? Any guesses as to who is the master of these?

 

[redfisher]

Dear Red,

Until you can prove minors are viewing SoWal?s political forum and that a moment of levity wasn?t badly needed here, a little less prudishness would be appreciated.

Thanks, 30-gAy

I wouldn't think I would need to prove anything...I would simply appreciate your "tolerance"...I don't consider it levity, I consider it vulgar...Red

 

[TNJed]

In all fairness I believe 30-gAys post was a double entendre since he was referring to Miss Kitty. There are no rimshots on message boards. Oops, there's another one.

 

[6thGen]

Dear Red,

Until you can prove minors are viewing SoWal?s political forum and that a moment of levity wasn?t badly needed here, a little less prudishness would be appreciated.

Thanks, 30-gAy

I'd say that the fact that you can't type out the word for a female dog without it being starred out sets the standard for what is considered vulgar by the owner of the site.

 

[Cheering472]

Dear Red,

Until you can prove minors are viewing SoWal?s political forum and that a moment of levity wasn?t badly needed here, a little less prudishness would be appreciated.

Thanks, 30-gAy

I got the joke. I was not offended and I've been seen in Sunday school on more than one occasion. (teaching even)