Discussion in 'Suggestions and questions' started by pocketfullofshells, Feb 13, 2014.
That is considered an ad hominem in most cases. For example when Paul Ryan says transgenerational poverty in America’s “inner cities” should be a focus of policy makers.
He was criticized by the left and labeled a bigot. There was enough pressure put on him that he even apologized the next day for saying it the way hid did.
However, when Obama said
Then the argument is considered valid?
I used some quotes from this article...
When a conservative Republican says we need to focus on government policies to help chronic poverty he is a pandering racist bigot but if a Democrat says it then he is trying to help the people.
Any one else see the double standard?
It almost reminds me a two dogs fighting over a piece of meat.
I think the crux of the issue is when you consider where the person is coming from ...
Liberals make emotional decisions - 'because it's right', 'we owe it to them' 'it's for their own good' 'it's only fair' ... this makes emotional arguments valid ... 'you're an idiot', 'you're a racist', 'you're [whatever the latest name calling is popular] ... name calling and shaming is their stock in trade. Unfortunately, it also makes their arguments weak because they can't justify 'it feels good' ... they can only shame you for not agreeing.
whereas conservatives deal in facts 'it will cost too much', 'the impact will be ...' 'the law says ...' 'the Constitution says' .... this means arguments are based in their perception of the facts ..
This divergence of baseline means they will never come to agreement on any subject ... because they are diametrically opposed. That doesn't mean that an individual can't move back and forth across the line ... it merely means that the two concepts are, by necessity, mutually exclusive.
As for the 'double standard' ... if you're not dealing in the same intellectual currency, you can't have agreement or consistency.
Oh, BTW - welcome aboard, Mr. Blackwell !
You so love making things up and pretending i said them dont you ? Perhaps more honest discussion from our lefties would be more atteactive ? I know you are capable,.ive seen it.
sorry your not in favor of it, you just don't care if people do it. And yes I am, just no one on this site worth the time...since the whole time I havebeen back, big rob has only posted once...and he is about the only one whos views I have any respect for. like I give a shit about steve KKK ox's views or what these tea baggers think.
What you really mean is that you can't bulldoze the people here now, so you can't get your daily ego injection by running roughshod over those who don't agree with you, and then they have the temerity to challenge you on your positions, knowing full well that you can't defend them, and are forced to resort to vulgar and racist attacks. Your arguments are intellectually bankrupt and your ad hominem attacks childish and insulting. I'm almost embarrassed for you ... almost.
(THAT is how you insult someone without resorting to vulgarisms and obscenities ... stick around. I'll teach you more.)
When did I indicate an opinion ? I dont concur that what you describe is plagerism. It is better to cite of course but there is no gain being had from it. Source is only significantto the extent that it suggests what bias is in effect. We all know any source has bias.
taking someones else s complete writing and posting it as your own is not? really?
Plagerism can pertain to words thoughts ideas which happens on most and post including this one. And the representing as original to you is hardly clear in this case. there really needs to be some sense of gain and its a stretch to think that chitter chattering on a chat boatd counts. Ill cite wiki so you dont get mad at me for stealing the definition id3as expressed there.
... and you saw this happen when?
Did I Mention the KKK?
this dumb worthless fuck just takes opion pieces and posts them, does not site the source or that he did not write them, or who actually did...so for anyone who is not smart enough to know he is a idiot , would think he sat down and tried to write it out himself. And if you take something off wiki and post it, with no links no siting of the source, and remove the writers name ... you call yourself a Moderator and can't even see most clear case of Plagiarism. What a joke you are. I guess the concpt of don't just copy past someones work and remove all credit to them, and post it like you wrote it just is no clear enough. what do you think a professor would say if you just copy pasted someone else's op ed piece and turned it in ? you would get a zero and kicked out class or school possible...
Shut the fuck up you mindless twit, you know exactly where as you where called on it over and over.
Name calling??? Such an adult approach ... what happened? Your mom tell you to get off the Internet?
I suggest you quit making yourself look stupid (a major accomplishment if you can do it), look up the definition of plagiarism (yes, that's how you spell it ... ask your Jr High teacher) ... and then do the adult thing and issue a public apology.
I suspect, however, that's too difficult for you ...
Of course, you could take the other path ... and fuck off.
I publicly apologize for the fact your not able to write your own opinions because you have to be told them first...and that saying where and who wrote something you stole is to hard for your small mind. And that Moderators on this site can't figure out that copy pasting someone else s complete work without any credit and no input of your own is not plagiarism
Separate names with a comma.