Nattering Nancy II

[christiefan915]

I could say the same thing about Hillary as SOS in The Obama Administration. Except Rice never had an Embassy destroyed and an Ambassador murdered and dragged through the streets.

She was complicit in pushing for war in Iraq... "The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." ... and therefore bears responsiblity for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the destruction of a sovereign nation.

 

[MAGA MAN]

The only point you are making clear, Right...is the one on top of your head.

The Internet forum...IS PREDOMINATELY ABOUT SHARING OPINIONS.

If you think the forum was set up so that you ask and others answer...that is just one more mistake you are making.

This is a forum on the internet, and the title is " Just Plain Politics! - Political Debate Forums". Key word: "debate". I expressed my opinion and justified it based on facts. You expressed your opinion and can't justify it, except to use logical fallacies. I win.

 

[MAGA MAN]

I don't think so...but if you point out a VALID logical fallacy, I will acknowledge it.

I doubt you have the personal integrity to ever acknowledge any mistakes.

Sure you will. Here's a short list:

1.

Only a weak woman...or a weaker man would consider Hillary Clinton to be a weak woman. Which are you?

False dichotomy

2.

Hillary is a hell of a lot stronger than some jerk on the Internet posting crap like you do under an alias.

Irrelevant comparison.

3.

There are many who suggest that Bill Clinton would be nowhere without Hillary. [Therefore] She is a strong woman.

"Some say" fallacy.

4.

You post under an alias because you have no guts.

Bare assertion.

 

[MAGA MAN]

She was complicit in pushing for war in Iraq... "The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." ... and therefore bears responsiblity for the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the destruction of a sovereign nation.

So you say.

 

[Nordberg]

Where would Hillary be without Bill? Nowhere.

You mean where would Bill be without Hillary. She was the one that pushed him to the whitehouse.

 

[domer76]

My guess is that you do not know any strong women.

I know plenty. Everyone of them, even the ones who detest Hillary Clinton, acknowledges that she is a STRONG woman.

But, perhaps you have been living under a rock.

Right is a through-and-through Thumper. You know those evangelical flat-earthers. They want their women to be subservient.

 

[MAGA MAN]

You mean where would Bill be without Hillary. She was the one that pushed him to the whitehouse.

 

[MAGA MAN]

Right is a through-and-through Thumper. You know those evangelical flat-earthers. They want their women to be subservient.

Zero logic here.

 

[domer76]

Zero logic here.

Right there, Thumper:

22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Ramen!

 

[MAGA MAN]

Right there, Thumper:

22 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.

Ramen!

OK Pastor Domer.

 

[Ross Dolan]

This is a forum on the internet, and the title is " Just Plain Politics! - Political Debate Forums". Key word: "debate". I expressed my opinion and justified it based on facts. You expressed your opinion and can't justify it, except to use logical fallacies. I win.

I express my opinions...you express your opinions.

Neither of us truly "justify" them...nor should we have to. Opinions of the sort being shared here often are the result of far-reaching events and influences in our lives.

I have no idea of what has made you the rather unlikable creature you seem to be (obtained through reading your responses)...and I do not care. I feel sorry you have to wake up each morning and be you...and have to look at life the unpleasant way you do.

You win the way Donald Trump wins...by a laughable declaration.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Sure you will. Here's a short list:

1. False dichotomy (Only a weak woman...or a weaker man would consider Hillary Clinton to be a weak woman. Which are you?)

You are absolutely correct...as written, it is a false dichotomy. I was driving toward the end question...and made the mistake of driving too quickly. I was wrong...you are correct.

Allow me to change it: There are people who, for a variety of reasons, consider Hillary Clinton to be a weak woman. Most of those people, male or female, seem to me to be rather weak themselves. I suspect that to be the situation in your case...so if I am correct, which are you...a weak male or a weak female?

2. Irrelevant comparison. (Hillary is a hell of a lot stronger than some jerk on the Internet posting crap like you do under an alias.)

I don't think that is actually an irrelevant comparison...it is simply an observation. In any case, if it is, it makes a point that needed to be made. There are times where, in formal debate, a faulty comparison ought not to be used, but informally, as in the discussion we are having, it may make a significant point.

It did here.

3. "Some say" fallacy. There are many who suggest that Bill Clinton would be nowhere without Hillary. [Therefore] She is a strong woman.

Nonsense. It is not a "some say fallacy" at all...even with your attempt to make it one by adding the "therefore"...which was not intended nor needed. This is straight out unethical on your part...although I doubt you will acknowledge it to be so.

4. Bare assertion. ( You post under an alias because you have no guts.)

Yup.

Nothing wrong with those. I notice you do it often. Look at your #3 and #11.

 

[MAGA MAN]

I express my opinions...you express your opinions.

Neither of us truly "justify" them...nor should we have to. Opinions of the sort being shared here often are the result of far-reaching events and influences in our lives.

I have no idea of what has made you the rather unlikable creature you seem to be (obtained through reading your responses)...and I do not care. I feel sorry you have to wake up each morning and be you...and have to look at life the unpleasant way you do.

You win the way Donald Trump wins...by a laughable declaration.

Actually I base my opinions on facts. If that makes me "unlikable" to you, it says more about you than about me.

 

[Ross Dolan]

You mean where would Bill be without Hillary. She was the one that pushed him to the whitehouse.

Exactly.

A point I made to Right earlier.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Right is a through-and-through Thumper. You know those evangelical flat-earthers. They want their women to be subservient.

Does seem that way, doesn't it.

I like the guy (or gal, I'm still not sure, although I think it is a guy). Always enjoy crossing swords with someone consumed by ego the way Right is.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Actually I base my opinions on facts.

Yeah...sure you do.

If that makes me "unlikable" to you, it says more about you than about me.

You may seem "unlikable" but I enjoy you.

If that says something about me to you...my pleasure.

 

[MAGA MAN]

You are absolutely correct...as written, it is a false dichotomy. I was driving toward the end question...and made the mistake of driving too quickly. I was wrong...you are correct.

Allow me to change it: There are people who, for a variety of reasons, consider Hillary Clinton to be a weak woman. Most of those people, male or female, seem to me to be rather weak themselves. I suspect that to be the situation in your case...so if I am correct, which are you...a weak male or a weak female?

Too funny. Here you admit your mistake, then repeat it.

I don't think that is actually an irrelevant comparison...it is simply an observation. In any case, if it is, it makes a point that needed to be made. There are times where, in formal debate, a faulty comparison ought not to be used, but informally, as in the discussion we are having, it may make a significant point.

It did here.

You can call it whatever you like, but it is still a comparison.

Nonsense. It is not a "some say fallacy" at all...even with your attempt to make it one by adding the "therefore"...which was not intended nor needed. This is straight out unethical on your part...although I doubt you will acknowledge it to be so.

Using insertions to clarify a quote isn't dishonest. Explain how your statement was not an "if, then", which justifies a "therefore".

Yup.

Nothing wrong with those. I notice you do it often. Look at your #3 and #11.

Big surprise that you won't admit your error here. /sarcasm

 

[MAGA MAN]

Yeah...sure you do.

If you could demonstrate otherwise then have at it.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Too funny. Here you admit your mistake, then repeat it.

No I did not. My rewording is NOT a false dichotomy. But I doubt you will be able to acknowledge that mistake on your part.

You can call it whatever you like, but it is still a comparison.

You have a problem with "comparisons?"

C'mon!

Using insertions to clarify a quote isn't dishonest. Explain how your statement was not an "if, then", which justifies a "therefore".

What you did there was to artificially build a "some say fallacy"...and then charged that I had done it.

Really. Work on your ethics a bit.

Big surprise that you won't admit your error here. /sarcasm

We all make assertions. You certainly do. What do you see as "an error" here?

 

[Ross Dolan]

I think what might be eating at Right...is the fact that Hillary Clinton has been chosen "The Most Admired Woman" in the world...more times than any other woman.*

Good!





*Annual Gallup Poll Most Admired Man taken since 1946...with Most Admired Woman starting in 1948.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallup's_most_admired_man_and_woman_poll