Safer now that "W" is gone
202 RepliesJump to last post
[quote=JackBlack]
Moraen:<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
First, I do not care what type of person Benjamin Franklin. If you have, problems with the idea attack the idea, not the man who said it. Your attack was ad hominem.[/quote]
It was me that made the clever and quite humorous reply to your 1700's-era freedom fighter quote. Nevertheless, it wasn't ad hominem. We live in a different time. Ben Franklin didn't walk through security lines at airports before boarding a 747. Ben Franklin didn't have access to semi-automatic weapons or grenades. I believe that the Constitution is a good indicator on how our country should be governed and run, but remember that those who wrote the Constitution were plowing fields for a living and had wooden teeth. Should the essential liberties we enjoy today be fully based off of what people 220 years ago considered "essential liberties"? *Note: I understand there have been a couple new amendments since 1787, but still.*Voltmoie:
Why should I care if your rights are violated, when you do not care if someone else rights are violated?<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
I believe when anyone rights are violated my rights are violated.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller (14 January 1892 – 6 March 1984)
[quote=JackBlack]Moraen:
Yo are still attacking the man instead of the IDEA. The idea still stands even if the man who said it did not live up to the quote. Again attack the IDEA not the person who said it. [/quote] Regarding the IDEA, define "essential LIBERTY".Utilizing the quotes of others to prove your point is a weak minds crutch - Volt 2009
[quote=voltmoie] [quote=JackBlack]Moraen:
Yo are still attacking the man instead of the IDEA. The idea still stands even if the man who said it did not live up to the quote. Again attack the IDEA not the person who said it. [/quote]I'm lost on your logic Jack, if the man didn't live up to the quote then the words are worthless.
[/quote]
<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Not so. The truth or falsehood of a statement holds no matter who says it. It does not matter who say the words, the statement is true or false on its own merits.
I prefer to use my own words to argue my points.
Pointing to past deeds is noble. Pointing to others words is hollow. - Volt 2009
Volt:
I do not plagiarize. If I take someone else idea, I credit them. Plagiarize is more then take a direct quote it also includes taking ideas.
<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
[quote=voltmoie]Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
[/quote] My guess he would be a FOOGLE
Volt:Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
Why is it a weak tactic?
Volt: Is it ok you you to quote people to make your point? I thought you wanted to use your own words?For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security. - Thomas Jefferson
[quote=BondGuy][quote=Milyunair]Moraen, I return to your opening comment and perception about apologist America. Bush was probably the last free market leader. We stood as a nation, and now we run to the corners, each man grabbing what cattle, guns, hired hands, fencing and supplies he can on his way to his ranch.
When I think of Bush, I think of Reagan. When I think of Reagan, I think of John Wayne. That turns into Clint Eastwood, but in even harder times, more like Tommy Lee Jones. The movie for our time is "Lonesome Dove". Only instead of driving the cattle to open Montana country, we drive back to our own ranches. And America, instead of looking outward to the Wild West, apologizes to the world. I took my son to a gun range for the first time this week. We rented a thirty eight special, a .22 target pistol, tried a nine millimeter Glock, and ended up with a fourty-four magnum. It felt great, and has nothing to do with paranoia or hatred, rather, it feels like reaffirming a basic American right and tradition. I encourage anyone who has not done so recently, go somewhere and handle some firearms in a responsible fashion and remember who we are, where we come from, how much we take for granted. Watch a few classical Westerns, too! We have not lost our nerve, we've just delegated too much responsibility to the wrong folks in government, big business and the unions. http://www.milyunair.com/[/quote] Shooting guns is a fun way to pass an afternoon. I actually prefer archery, even though i suck at it. Money spent on good equipment is no substitute for time on the range. My sons are gun happy so i end up going to gun show, a real experience, and shooting ranges with them. My older son is a sheriff's deputy who is on the fast response team, equiv of SWAT, so he can shoot a fly off a wall at 100 yards with a pistol. I can't even see the wall. The Western thing is problematic in that many depict the Indians as the bad guys. The truth is far different. Yet, like many i grew up with the impression that the Indians had it coming. Shocked to learn that i had been brainwashed by something as simple a movie screen.[/quote] That would be pretty cool to have the skill to shoot a fly off the wall with a pistol. Good idea, we'll go try archery next. I guess the film to get a different perspective on the Indians is "Dances with Wolves". Yeah, they got screwed.My rights are not violated when Habeeb’s phone is wiretapped. They are violated when some liberal bytch passes a 1900 page health care plan.
Volt:[quote=voltmoie]Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
Why is it a weak tactic?
[/quote]
If I must explain it to you then I won't quote boy.
Volt:[quote=voltmoie]Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
Why is it a weak tactic?
[/quote] "There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom." Jack, who said that?[quote=voltmoie]Still, you’re a silly bastard. [/quote]
I am being serious…water-boarding is simply the “torture” they are using to test legal an public opinion. The real torture is pharmaceuticals.
Imagine this, they give you a needle and all the sudden you feel like your body is on fire; it is excruciatingly painful, but you don’t die. They give you another shot and you can actually see worms eating your skin; just like LSD but 1000x more real. They give you a third shot and it goes away (in 20 minutes). Then they ask you, what do you know?
If they do this enough times, you will go insane. You’d rip off your own skin if you weren’t strapped to the table.
Now imagine this, instead of being a Muslim, you are a right-leaning ambassador. You are researching some false statements by the Democratic House, Senate & Presidency when all of the sudden (thanks to an article written by Joe Wilson), you are labeled a spy. The CIA needs to know what you know so they use “enhanced interrogation techniques” that were approved by Volt and the Bush administration. Even though you haven’t even had a trial, you can now be subjected to torture that is worse than death…are you sure you are ok with this?
Volt:[quote=JackBlack][quote=voltmoie]Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
Why is it a weak tactic?
[/quote] "There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom." Jack, who said that?[/quote] 3rdyrp2: President George W. Bush speech writer. PS. I voted for Bush in 2000. I did not vote for him in 2004Volt:[quote=JackBlack][quote=voltmoie]Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
Why is it a weak tactic?
[/quote]
If I must explain it to you then I won't quote boy.
[/quote] Volt: Can't or won't?
Volt:[quote=3rdyrp2][quote=JackBlack][quote=voltmoie]Who said you plagiarized? I said you can’t make the point yourself so you utilize a convenient quote. It’s a crutch and weak tactic to deploy in a debate. Point to historical events and actions … not quotes which you have no appropriate context to understand their true meaning.
Minus google what are you?
Why is it a weak tactic?
[/quote] "There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom." Jack, who said that?[/quote] 3rdyrp2: President George W. Bush speech writer. PS. I voted for Bush in 2000. I did not vote for him in 2004[/quote] He said this AFTER the 2004 election. The point is to agree with Volt that using peoples quotes is a weak tactic for an argument because my quote goes with what you believe in, but the quote is from someone who you probably don't agree with philosophically when it comes to stuff like "how to fight terrorists", and how to "break the reign of hatred and resentment". I could probably find a quote from Hitler from a time he said something like "Negotiation is always a better alternative to war", but does that mean that is what he believes, or is it just an out of context sentence?