There is a difference in “pointing out a factual error,” “pointing out an unsupported claim,” and pointing out what he perceives as a problem in an argument. They are three different things. With all due respect, what John perceives to be a problem may not be a problem at all and may not deserve to be taken seriously. Usually someone is around anyway to address illogical arguments and mistaken thinking anyway.
I disagree with you about how John is “usually” responded to in the other cases. He doesn’t get “shouted down” when he points out facts. No one shouts anyone down here. He does sometimes get the label “Bush apologist” and sometimes he deserves it.
Regarding the Gallup Poll:
John, if you think a survey of Americans aged 18 and older reflects a “universal” opinion on the Iraq war, you might want to broaden your reading interests. In what countries will you find a majority of the people supporting Bush’s decision to invade Iraq?
But you’re right, I don’t really think that John Mace doubts even one word of Arar’s story with even the smallest fiber of his being. He is a reasonable, intelligent person, and has seen the same information as the rest of us.
There are cirmumstances where the evidence is so overwhelming that it becomes contingent upon the doubters to justify their doubt.
Watching him carefully weigh his statements, desperately trying to continue to defend Bush, alongside his fellow Bush supporters who are not quite so subtle, calls to mind a famous dialogue by Lewis Carroll:
Man, reading this thread (and many others) just makes me want to avoid any and all political dealings save election day.
In some other thread I tried to make a comparison to US politics being about which team was better while both were losing in a stadium crumbling before their eyes. That was met with a less than friendly response. Proving the climate of debate has gotten to the point where it isn’t debate.
It isn’t. At least not on boards that embolden posters with a false sense of superiority in “fighting ignorance”. We’re all just people pounding away at our keyboards stating opinions and buying into the sense of being right because the motto of the particular board seems comforting.
Every argument made here is the same argument made on thousands of boards each day. Boards of all stripes. Yes, it’s fun to post an opinion and argue other opinions, but too often it’s just an excercise in self-aggrandization. (sp?)
When it got to the point of a mention of Bill Clinton inviting ridicule no matter the reference, I realized it wasn’t debate, just banner waving.
Most of my political posts have been likely over the top. I never meant them to be, but the culture around here just drew me in.
So this is my good-bye to almost anything involving politics on this board. It’s become anonymous written masturbation augmented by links to sketchy blogs and the occasional zinger. The worst part is the climate has expanded from websites to actual political parties and news rooms.
If anyone here really has the answer to the problems we face, turn the fucking computer off and go do something about it.
I will glady concede the difference between an error and a perceived error. Thank you for the clarification. I don’t see, though, where someone who calmly points out a perceived error needs to be dismissed every time by some posters. Not everyone does it, but some do.
There I must disagree with you. I can’t construe the rabid, throwing-cat tone of some posters as anything but shouting down the people they are arguing with.
That’s what kills me. All along, the Dems and liberals have been right about virtually everything they said about Bush: he HAS assaulted civil liberties, he DID lie about WMDs, Iraq IS a bogus war, they DID torture people, there WERE secret prisons, they DID use illegal wiretaps, they WERE taking bribes from Abramof … the list goes on and on and on and on …
But there’s a certain breed of “moderate” who are so determined to maintain a balanced viewpoint that they can’t admit that the truth is piled high on the side of on faction while the other faction lacks any vestige of it. “The Dems are just as bd as the Pubs” they say. And they won’t give us any credit for having been right in almost every case, or look askance at the Pubs for being lying sacks of shit all along. Look, people at LEAST look at the source. Pay SOME attention to who’s been telling you nothing but bullshit and who’s been nothing but right. If you have such a vaunted concern for the truth, maybe you should pay SOME fucking attention to who’s providing it.
This is quite correct, but you don’t have to say goodbye entirely. The BoBBs (Brotherhood of Bush Bashers) provide a certain amount of reading amusement if it’s a slow night in MPSIMS or CS.
There’s my main problem with them. They need to be spending all this time and energy identifying and promoting a candidate I and millions like me can vote for next time. I voted for Clinton twice, and I would have enjoyed the opportunity to vote against GWB in ‘02, but I enjoyed voting against Kerry even more. I would vote for GWB over Kerry again today.
You guys need to get busy and find somebody middle of the road Americans can vote for, or else it’ll be Bush’s Designated Successor gettin’ our votes in '08.
Concern trolls? There’re a lot of faux not-republicans out there today, hawking ‘moderate’ advice for the purpose of sowing discord among the enemies of the radical right.
You mean people on this board? Or pundits like Andrew Sullivan?
What evidence do you have that such people are really agents of the radical right? How many of these people are there? Is John Mace the Bush Apologist one of them?
If you can’t name one person you consider a “concern troll”, then perhaps the category does not exist. And if you can only come up with one or two names, then “a lot” might not be the best way to estimate the numbers of these cryptofascists.
Well, yeah. Because that’s what happens when you forget that the winning team is in charge of stadium upkeep.
When Team D was at least partly involved in the running of things, the stadium was in reasonably good shape and was getting regular maintenance. Now that Team R is controlling everything, the stadium’s crumbling before our eyes.
I agree with you that the way the game itself is played is stupid, but there ain’t no other game; this is unfortunately how we determine who takes care of the stadium. Team R is unquestionably superior at playing the game, but they suck at maintaining the stadium.
There’s a decent body of evidence to support the proposition that this is because they don’t give a good goddamn about the stadium, but are far more interested in the welfare of a small but powerful group of their fans, who in turn make sure they are able to hire the best coaches and trainers and practice fields and equipment so they can continue winning the game and further aiding that group of fans.
I also agree with you that the argument about which team is better is stupid, at least if the argument is about which team is better at maintaining the stadium. That’s transparently obvious.
Sayonara.
I’ve been doing what little I can, over the past few years, to try to get Team D in a better position on the field. As I’ve noted, they’re the ones who can be trusted with stadium upkeep.
No, I think it’s my brain that needs some looking after. Did as you asked and still had the ABC question come up first – bewilderment ensued, thoughts of Dell computers demonic possesion came to mind. And then I remembered this little “refresh” button in the second line of my Firefox broweser.
Apologies are in order – it’s a site I visit on a fairly regular basis, and having a large hard-drive I keep my cached settings quite high. Anyhow, after hitting refresh, indeed, the ABC question I was quoting dropped down to third…while yours topped the list.
Hiya, duffer. You played a great game. Nicely fought. Welcome to the lurkers corner.
Now, you’re going to keep reading GD posts, right?
OK. Now then, you’re going to read some real annoying bullshit from the usual crowd of Bush haters. It’ll take a while, but you’ll learn to ignore them.
Just don’t respond. Nope. Not even once. No matter how much stupidity you see, don’t post. Nothing good can come of it.
Maybe someday the board will shift back to some kind of balance, but for now the lunatics have taken over the asylum. It’s really not worth it.
This is what’s so funny. Well, not “funny” funny, more like tragic funny. “Balance”, in the brave new world of pubbiespeak, is the ability to be wrong nearly 100% of the time, but get an equal share of affirmation and respect. “Lunacy” is when others cry foul.
And if the only way to win is to cater to the scum who voted in a monster and fool like Bush ( twice ! ), then what’s the point of “winning” ? If you want a monster in power, just vote for a Republican, not an “evil-lite” Democrat.